---It is very clear in Ephesians and Colossians that Paul is making the Sanctuary Message jargon implicit in the letters but to Hebrews he made it explicit and clear. He is in bonds. Why would he do that? The problem is not Rome since he did it with the book of Hebrews.

---What were the factors that made him hold back on direct references to a heavenly temple where Christ is in Ephesians and Colossians? And just mentioned it by the way style?

---Should one put the Sanctuary Message doctrine of Hebrews 7-10 over Ephesians and Colossians?

---Absolutely. Paul Bayne in 1617, the year of his death, published a commentary on Ephesians 1. At two places he made it clear that the jargon of the remission of sins by the blood of Christ is actually prefigured in the Sanctuary when the blood was sprinkled on the altar.

 

Source:

Paul Baynes, A commentarie vpon the first chapter of the epistle of Saint Paul, written to the Ephesians Wherein, besides the text fruitfully explained: some principall controuersies about predestination are handled, and diuers arguments of Arminius are examined. By Mr. Paul Bayne, sometimes preacher of Gods word at Saint Andrevves in Cambridge. Baynes, Paul, d. 1617. London: Printed by Thomas Snodham, for Robert Milbourne, and are to be sold in Pauls Church-yard, at the signe of the Beare, 1618.

 

“Wherefore let vs get our consciences sprinkled with this, and flye to it by faith, as they were wont to the sanctu∣ary, to the hornes of the alter…” p. 188.

Source: https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=njp.32101066129600&view=1up&seq=67  on page 67 out of 430 pages.

Full text is here https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/ssd?id=njp.32101066129600;seq=251

“Through his bloud.] Obserue, what it is by which wee are ransomed and redeemed, euen the bloud of Christ; This was it, which in the bloud of all the Sacrifices was prefigured: We are redeemed, saith Peter, not with siluer or gold, but with the bloud of Christ, a lambe vndefiled.”

이 게시물을...