1. Branch. Two things to explicate the first Branch. 1. That Christs offering himselfe was intended as a sacrifice for Enmities betweene the Saints, as well as against God.

TWo things are distinctly to be spoken unto for the clearing of these things.

1. That the offering up Christs flesh on the Crosse, was intended as a sacrifice, as well for our reconciliation mu∣tuall, as for reconciliation with God.

2. How according to the analogy of the ends, use, and intent of sacrifices of old, the offering up of Christs flesh should be intended and directed as a sacrifice, to take away these our owne enmities, and make peace and friendship amongst our selves.

For the first, which is the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 of this point, That as a sa∣crifice it was so intended, the whole frame and contexture of these words doth evince it.

1. When he sayes v. 15. That he hath abolisht the enmity in his flesh, he doth undeniably intend that enmity which Page  28 was betweene these twaine, the Jew and Gentile (this hath beene proved afore:) and therefore he is found par∣ticularly to instance in the rites of the ceremoniall Law, (which by a metonymie he calls the enmity,) as the outward occasion of that bitter enmity in each others hearts.

Now then 2. That this enmity was taken away by his flesh as a sacrifice;

First, The laying together the phrases of the Text, evin∣ceth it; as when he sayes, He hath abolisht this enmity in his flesh. 1. In saying the enmity in his flesh, it necessarily im∣ports his having taken that enmity in or upon his owne flesh, to answer for it in their stead. Even as well, as when in the 16. verse, he is said to have slaine the enmity (namely, against God) in himselfe; thereby is intended, that he tooke that enmity on himselfe; undertaking to pacify and allay, and by being himselfe slaine, to slay it. 2. In saying in the time past, that he hath abolisht it, in his flesh, this notes out a vir∣tuall act perfectly done and past, (as in him:) by vertue of which it is to be destroyed actually in us after. Unto which 3. adde that in the 16. v. there is an additionall word [By the Crosse] put in, which 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, or in common, is to be referrd to the abolishing of this enmity in his flesh, v. 15. and reconciling us mutually; as well as to the slaying of the en∣mity against God mentioned, v. 16. as that which equally and alike shewes the way, how, we are to understand that in his flesh, he hath perfectly abolisht both these enmities; name∣ly, by taking on his flesh that enmity, and offering it up upon the Crosse as a sacrifice for it. For to say, by the Crosse, or by the sacrifice of himselfe on the Crosse, is all one: so as what the one verse wants, the other supplies: In his flesh, sayes the 15. v. By the Crosse, sayes the 16. and (which will warrant this) we have elswhere both put together, 1 Coloss. 20, 22. By the bloud of his Crosse, in the body of his flesh, through death.

Page  29 2. The paralleling this place with that of the 2 Coloss. argues this: The enmity here instanced in, by a metonymie is the rites of the ceremoniall Law: which he is sayd to have made voyd or weake. Thus expressely v. 15. Having a∣bolisht in his flesh the enmity, the Law of Commandements in Ordinances: Now the abolishing thereof is in that second to the Colossians expressely said to have beene by the sacrifice of His Flesh on the Crosse: or which is all one, That, by His being nayled to the Crosse, He nayled it to His Crosse, Coloss. 2. 14. Blotting out the hand-writing of Ordinances that was against us, and tooke it out of the way, NAYLING IT TO HIS CROSSE, which fully accords with this Text, He abolisht it in his Flesh by the Crosse.

Lastly, (for a winding up of this) The parallel which the Apostle observeth in his Discourse betweene his effect∣ing our Peace and Reconciliation with God, and this our Peace and Reconciliation one with another, will induce to it: He being first alike in common termed our peace. v. 14. in respect to either. Then to demonstrate each apart, a double enmity (as I observed at first) is distinctly and apart mentioned by him. The one v. 15. the other v. 16. Of the one he sayes, he hath abolisht: of the other, hee hath slaine it: of the one he sayes, he hath abolisht it in His Flesh: of the other, in himselfe (as the Greeke hath it v. 16.) And so those words by the Crosse are common to each: As those first words, [He is our Peace] were to all that followed. And so as the Parallel hath hitherto run along in these particulars, so it holds on, that looke How in this, or by what way He slew the enmity betwixt God and us, on the Crosse, by the same way he abolisht the enmity betweene the Jew and Gentile, or the people of God mutually: But he slew the enmity betweene God and us, on the Crosse by taking those our enmities against God on Himselfe, and they being found on him, he was slaine and sacrificed for them on the Page  30 Crosse, and thereby slew them and reconciled us to God: In like manner then it is to be understood, that HE first tooke all our enmities against one another on His Flesh [in His Flesh] sayes the Text: (and it was the generall intent of Sacrifices to be offred up, for what was layd upon them or reckoned to them.) And so, our enmities being there all found in His Flesh, that Flesh was offred up for them, and so they were all dissolved and abolisht and made weak, as the Text speaks of them, in his being dissolved or made weake (as the 2 Cor. 13. and Phil. 3. speakes in like manner of him.)

So then as there was a double enmity, and a double slaying which the Apostle mentions; so there must be in this one Sa∣crifice a double consideration in the intention thereof: It is a Sacrifice serving at once, to slay & abolish both the one and the other: he being in common alike and indifferently termed, Our peace, as in relation unto either; there being nothing also done for us by Christ, but the like was first done on Himselfe.