reach of human penetration, and has under the gospel been made known for the salvation of men, is one often presented by the apostle, Rom. 16, 25. 26. Eph. 3, 9.
8. Which none of the princes of this world knew : for had they known (it), they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.
Which refers to wisdom^ and not to glory ; because the former, and not the latter, is the subject of discourse. ' Which wisdom none of the princes, i. e. the great men, of this world knew.' The reference is here principally to the rulers of the Jews, the authors of the crucifixion of Christ, and the repre- sentatives of the class to which they belonged. It was the world in its princes who rejected Christ.
Lord of glory is a title of divinity. It means, possessor of divine excellence. " Who is the King of glory ? The Lord of hosts, he is the King of glory," Ps. 24, 10. Acts 7, 2. James 2, 1. Eph. 1, lY. The person crucified, therefore, was a diviue person. Hence the deed was evidence of inconceivable blind- ness and wickedness. It was one that could only be done through ignorance. " And now, brethren," said the apostle Peter to the Jews, " I wot that through ignorance ye did it, as did also your rulers," Acts 3, 17. The fact that the princes of this world were so blind as not to see that Christ was the Lord of glory, Paul cites as proof of their ignorance of the wisdom of God. Had they known the one, they would have known the other.
This passage illustrates a very important principle or usage of Scripture. We see that the person of Christ may be desig- nated from his divine nature, when what is affirmed of him is true only of his human nature. The Lord of glory was cruci- fied ; the Son of God was born of a woman ; he who was equal with God humbled himself to be obedient unto death. In like manner we speak of the birth or death of a man without meaning that the soul is born or dies; and the Scriptures speak of the birth and death of the Son of God, without mean- ing that the divine nature is subject to these changes. It is also plain that to predicate ignorance, subjection, suffering, death, or any other limitation of the Son of God, is no more inconsistent with the divinity of the person so designated, than to predicate birth and death of a man, is inconsistent with the immateriality and immortality of the human soul.