The Nugget:
Mat 21:43 Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof.
My Comment:
There is much misunderstanding about Bible prophecy today. Some of this mistaken understanding is inexcusable. Many who would try to interpret the Bible on this subject have simply not done their homework first!
There is an ongoing discussion on this site regarding a post I wrote about Genesis 12:3. This verse is very relevant to what is happening in Israel right now.
One of the participants in the discussion kindly referred me to a book that she believes refutes the positions I have taken about Bible prophecy on this site.
Here is my refutation of that book:
I have just finished reading The Parousia by James Stuart Russell. This book is 561 pages long, so it has taken me some time to carefully read and study it.
On this site in the October 2010 Archives I have posted 24 Rules of Interpretation which must be carefully followed in order to correctly interpret the Bible. Rule 9 states:
(9) You cannot leave out material which, if included, would require or necessitate a change in the interpretation. Mat 4:6.
As I read through The Parousia, I found that the author most helpfully arranged his discussion in the order of the New Testament books.
I eagerly looked forward to reading his discussion of a most important text found in Matthew 21:43,
Mat 21:43 Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof.
The author makes no mention of this text anywhere in his book.
I have discussed this text at least three times on this site quite thoroughly:
Anyone who genuinely desires to understand Matthew 21:43 is encouraged and invited to read those three posts to learn more about what the Bible teaches about Bible prophecy.
Matthew 21:43 is a crucially important text about Bible prophecy and must not be neglected or avoided if we are to understand Bible prophecy correctly!
James Stuart Russell’s book, The Parousia, has this to say about the Antichrist:
ANTICHRIST NOT A PERSON, BUT A PRINCIPLE
1 JOHN 2:18.—‘Even now are there many antichrists.’
In the opinion of some commentators the name ‘the antichrist’ is supposed to designate a particular individual, the incarnation and embodiment of enmity to the Lord Jesus Christ; and as no such person has hitherto appeared in history, they have concluded that his manifestation is still future, but that the personal antichrist may be expected immediately before the ‘end of the world.’ This seems to have been the opinion of Dr. Alford, who says:—
‘According to this view we still look for the man of sin, in the fulness of the prophetic sense, to appear, and that immediately before the coming of the Lord.’*
There is here, however, a strange confounding of things which are entirely different,—‘the man of sin’ and ‘the apostasy;’ the former undoubtedly a person, as we have already seen; the latter a principle, or heresy, manifesting itself in a multitude of persons. It is impossible, with this declaration of St. John before us,—‘Even now are there many antichrists’—to regard the antichrist as a single individual. It is true that in every individual who held the antichristian error, antichrist might be said to be personified; but this is a very different thing from saying that the error is incarnate and embodied in one particular person as its head and representative. The expression ‘many antichrists’ proves that the name is not the exclusive designation of any individual.
Russell, J. S. (1878). The Parousia: A Critical Inquiry into the New Testament Doctrine of Our Lord’s Second Coming (pp. 331–332). Daldy, Isbister & Co.
Even though Mr. Russell does quote the entire text of 1 John 2:18 a few pages back, he quotes only the latter part of the verse at the head of this discussion. Of course the first part of the verse contradicts what Mr. Russell has to say about the second part of the verse.
Mr. Russell makes frequent reference to Matthew 24:3,
Mat 24:3 And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?
He very correctly points out that the “end of the world” should be translated “end of the age.”
Mr. Russell also points out that the word “end” here translates the Greek word “sunteleia,” but here he goes astray. Mr. Russell fails to point out that “sunteleia” refers to the conjunction of two ages, the culmination of one age and the beginning of another age.
I placed this note in The New Treasury of Scripture Knowledge and The Ultimate Cross Reference Treasury at Matthew 24:3,
the end. Gr. sunteleia, *S# G4930. The joining of two ages, the consummation or completion of the various parts of a scheme. Vine states “The word does not denote a termination, but the heading up of events to the appointed climax” (Dictionary, vol. 2, p. 27).
Preterists like Mr. James Stuart Russell make the astonishing claim that all the prophecies Jesus gave in Matthew 24 and 25, Mark 13, and Luke 21 were completely fulfilled by 70 AD, the Fall of Jerusalem. For Mr. Russell, this includes what Jesus said to the High Priest and Sanhedrim as recorded in Matthew 26:64,
Mat 26:64 Jesus saith unto him, Thou hast said: nevertheless I say unto you, Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.
Other related texts make the same prediction:
Matthew 24:30
30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.
King James Version
Luke 9:26
26 For whosoever shall be ashamed of me and of my words, of him shall the Son of man be ashamed, when he shall come in his own glory, and in his Father’s, and of the holy angels.
King James Version
Luke 17:24
24 For as the lightning, that lighteneth out of the one part under heaven, shineth unto the other part under heaven; so shall also the Son of man be in his day.
King James Version
The text that Mr. Russell believes requires this immediate fulfillment to be witnessed by at least some of those who heard Jesus give this Olivet Discourse is Matthew 16:27, 28,
Mat 16:27 For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works.
Mat 16:28 Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.
I have furnished the following note for Matthew 16:28 in The New Treasury of Scripture Knowledge and also The Ultimate Cross Reference Treasury:
see. Note: This appears to refer to the mediatorial kingdom which our Lord was about to set up, by the destruction of the Jewish nation and polity, and the diffusion of the gospel throughout the world.
The preceding original Comprehensive Bible note reflects a mistaken prophetic position still held by some Amillenarian interpreters, answered directly by Peters (Theocratic Kingdom, vol. 2, Proposition 153, Observation 4, Note 4, p. 562), who states “who urge the destruction of Jerusalem (which John only survived) as the fulfillment (of Mat 16:27, 28).
How this can be reconciled with a coming in glory, with a coming of the Son of Man (i.e. in His humanity), etc., we are not informed.
More than this: this coming is specifically predicted, over against all such assertions, to be one, not for the destruction of Jerusalem but for its salvation, as e.g. Psa 102:16, “when the Lord shall build up Zion, He shall appear in His glory,” with which compare Mic 3:12 in connection with following chapter; Zechariah 14; Amos 9:11, etc.”
In context, however, the experiences on the mount of transfiguration reported in chapter 17 may be the fulfillment of this prophecy. Peters also notes in connection with the transfiguration, that “the glorified condition of Christ, Moses, and Elias thus indicates…the futurity of the Kingdom.—a Kingdom not to be realized at the First Advent in humiliation, not during the absence of the Bridegroom, but at the Second Advent, when He and His saints come ’in glory.’”
The transfiguration furnished “an earnest, actual reception of glory,” and served as “a most direct proof that the covenant and prophets would yet be fulfilled.”
The transfiguration reveals the relationships of those who will be with Christ in his future eternal earthly kingdom. Peter, James, and John, represent unglorified, mortal men living on the earth, who personally witness and rejoice in the manifested glory of the Messiah.
Jesus is personally present in this kingdom in His state of glory, as are Moses and Elias, who also appeared “in glory.” Moses and Elias are purposely chosen as a correct exhibition of the two parties, forming one class, who shall appear in glory with Christ: (1) the dead saints, and (2) the living saints translated. Peters notes that the transfiguration “stands forth, pre-eminently, as a Divine confirmation of the Theocratic Kingship of Jesus, of the glory of His saints, and of the happiness of the nations who shall witness it—a fact so striking and corroborative of the ultimate Redemption of saints and of the race, that Peter seizes upon it as a grand proof that Jesus shall come unto so great Salvation” (Theocratic Kingdom, vol. 2, p. 561).