parable of the tenants – Full Preterism is Gospel Eschatology – overcoming "the death" from Genesis 2:17/3:15 to Revelation 21:4/22:17

The Parable of the Tenants: Jesus’ Indictment of Israel’s Leadership and the Coming Judgment Matthew 21:33–46 / Mark 12:1–12 / Luke 20:9–19

The Parable of the Tenants, recorded in Matthew 21:33–46, Mark 12:1–12, and Luke 20:9–19, stands as one of Jesus’ most pointed critiques of Israel’s religious leadership. Delivered during His final week in Jerusalem, this parable unveils God’s patience, Israel’s rebellion, and the inevitable judgment that would culminate in the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. As a parallel account across the Synoptic Gospels, the parable shares a consistent core: a landowner entrusts his vineyard to tenants, sends servants to collect the harvest, and faces violent rejection. When he sends his son, the tenants kill him, triggering divine judgment. Jesus concludes by quoting Psalm 118:22–23, identifying Himself as the “stone the builders rejected” and foreshadowing the transfer of the kingdom to a new covenant people. This article explores the parable’s meaning, its historical and theological context, and its fulfillment in the first century, drawing on Scripture and scholarly insights to illuminate its enduring significance.

Variations Across the Synoptic Gospels

Though the parable’s essence remains consistent, each Gospel writer tailors the account to their audience, emphasizing distinct details:

Matthew (21:33–46) underscores the Pharisees’ realization that the parable targets them (v. 45). It mentions multiple servants, symbolizing the prophets sent to Israel, and explicitly ties the judgment to the kingdom being given to others (v. 43).

Mark (12:1–12) offers the most concise version, vividly describing the vineyard’s features—a wall, tower, and winepress—evoking Isaiah 5:1–7, where Israel is God’s vineyard.

Luke (20:9–19) highlights the crowd’s horror at the judgment (“God forbid!” v. 16) and emphasizes the tenants’ rejection of the son. Luke uniquely notes the landowner’s absence for “a long time” (v. 9), a detail central to the parable’s timeline.

These variations reflect the authors’ theological priorities but do not alter the parable’s core message. Scholars argue that the accounts likely stem from a single teaching event, with differences arising from the evangelists’ editorial choices to address their communities. The parable’s context—Jesus’ confrontations with the religious leaders following John the Baptist’s ministry—frames it as a continuation of His indictment against their failure to bear fruit (Matt. 21:12–32; Luke 20:1–8).

The Parable’s Symbolism and Historical Context

The parable’s imagery is rich with Old Testament echoes, particularly Isaiah 5:1–7, where Israel is depicted as God’s vineyard, expected to yield righteousness but producing injustice. The landowner represents God, the tenants symbolize Israel’s leaders, and the vineyard is the covenant nation. The servants sent to collect the harvest signify the prophets, repeatedly mistreated or killed (cf. Matt. 23:34–37). The son, the landowner’s heir, is unmistakably Jesus, whose death outside Jerusalem’s gates fulfills the parable’s climax.

The “long time” of the landowner’s absence (Luke 20:9) is pivotal. It reflects God’s longsuffering during the period from John the Baptist’s ministry (circa AD 27) to the destruction of Jerusalem (AD 70). This roughly 40-year span, often termed “Israel’s last days,” aligns with Jesus’ warnings about that generation (Matt. 24:34). Gary DeMar, in his analysis of Matthew 24–25, provides clarity on this phrase:

“Notice that the evil slave says, ‘My master is not coming for a long time’ (Matt. 24:48). The evil slave then proceeds to ‘beat his fellow-slaves and eat and drink with drunkards’ (24:49). But to the surprise of the ‘evil slave,’ the master returned when he least expected him (24:50). The master did not return to cut the evil slave’s distant relatives in pieces (24:51); he cut him in pieces. The evil slave was alive when the master left, and he was alive when the master returned. In this context, a ‘long time’ must be measured against a person’s lifetime.”[1]

DeMar’s insight underscores that the “long time” in the Parable of the Tenants, like in the Parables of the Talents (Matt. 25:19) and the Ten Virgins (Matt. 25:1–13), refers to a period within the lifetime of Jesus’ audience—approximately AD 27 to AD 70. This harmonizes with New Testament usage of “a long time” as an extended but not indefinite period (e.g., Luke 8:27; Acts 14:3). During this window, God sent John the Baptist and his disciples, followed by Jesus and His apostles, calling Israel to repentance. Yet, the leaders’ rejection of John (Matt. 21:25–32) and their role in Jesus’ crucifixion fulfilled the tenants’ rebellion.

Psalm 118: The Rejected Cornerstone and AD 70

The parable’s conclusion cites Psalm 118:22–23, where Jesus identifies Himself as the “stone the builders rejected” that becomes the cornerstone. This is the second reference to Psalm 118 in Matthew 21 (cf. v. 9, during the Triumphal Entry). Sung during Passover, Psalm 118 celebrated God’s deliverance, proclaiming that the rejected stone would triumph (Ps. 118:6–7, 22).

Ironically, as Josephus records, it was during Passover in AD 70, while Jerusalem’s inhabitants sang this psalm to welcome pilgrims, that Roman armies began encircling the city. The song of joy became an unwitting herald of judgment, fulfilling Jesus’ prophecy that they would “see” Him coming in judgment (Matt. 23:39; Ps. 118:26).

Paul and Peter further develop this imagery. In Ephesians 2:14–22, Paul cites Psalm 118:22 to depict the Church as a new temple, built on Christ the cornerstone, uniting Jews and Gentiles. Similarly, Peter in 1 Peter 2:4–8 describes believers as “living stones” forming a “spiritual house,” with Christ as the cornerstone, while those who reject Him are “destined” to stumble. These apostolic interpretations confirm that the parable’s judgment—the transfer of the kingdom to a new people—found fulfillment in the establishment of the Church as God’s covenant community post-AD 70.

Deuteronomy 32: God Rejected as Rock, Israel’s End, and the New Nation

Jesus also draws on Deuteronomy 32, the Song of Moses, to frame the parable’s judgment. In Matthew 21:41, the tenants’ fate is sealed: God will “put those wretches to a miserable death and let out the vineyard to other tenants who will give him the fruits in their seasons.” This echoes Jesus’ declaration in verse 43: “The kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people producing its fruits.” The Pharisees rightly discerned that the parable targeted them (v. 45).

Deuteronomy 32:20–43 prophesies a “perverse generation” that would reject God as their “Rock,” leading to their “end” through fire and the rise of “another Nation” (Deut. 32:4–5, 15–22, 29–43). Peter applied this to his generation, urging them to be saved from it (Acts 2:40; cf. Deut. 32:5) and identifying the Church as the new “nation” built on Christ (1 Pet. 2:4–9; cf. Deut. 32:20-22). The judgment of AD 70, when Roman armies burned Jerusalem (cf. Matt. 22:7), marked the culmination of this prophecy.

The parable not only indicts the religious leaders but also redefines the kingdom as open to all who bear fruit, regardless of ethnicity. Similarly, the parable’s subversive edge: by portraying the tenants’ audacity in killing the son, Jesus exposes the absurdity of rejecting God’s ultimate messenger. There is economic and power hungry imagery—tenants seizing the vineyard reflects the leaders’ desire to retain power over God’s covenant people, a theme already seen with Jesus’ temple cleansing (Matt. 21:12–17) and the leadership questioning Jesus’ authority due to the insecurity of theirs among the people (Matt. 21:23-27).

Implications for Today

The Parable of the Tenants transcends time; it challenges us to examine our response to the gospel. Jesus’ cursing of the fig tree (Matt. 21:18–19), symbolizing Israel’s fruitlessness, serves as a warning: God demands the fruit of faith when the gospel comes. If God would harden his covenant people and bring them to her final “end” like a corpse the vultures gorged upon for rejecting his Son, what will he do with those who reject the Spirit and the Bride who say “come” (Rev. 22:2, 17)?

The judgment of AD 70 decisively ended old covenant Israel’s role as the kingdom’s steward, a reality that undermines premillennialist claims, whether Historic Premillennialism or Dispensational Zionism. Assertions that modern Israel’s formation in 1948 fulfills prophecy distort Scripture’s clear teaching: post-AD 70, the kingdom belongs to the Church, the new covenant “nation” (Matt. 21:43; 1 Pet. 2:9).

As I’ve argued, Jesus is unequivocal: old covenant Israel would “never” bear fruit in its former form (Matt. 21:19). The myriad Old and New Testament texts misused to prop up Zionist eschatology blatantly distort this reality. The Parable of the Tenants calls us to embrace our role as faithful tenants in God’s vineyard, bearing fruit for His glory as we abide in Christ-the True Vine / Israel of God. We rest in the unshakable truth that Jesus, the rejected cornerstone, reigns as the foundation of His eternal kingdom which we have graciously been called to partake in.

Below is a chart that illustrates the parallels between Jesus’ teaching on His rejection as the Cornerstone and the coming judgment in AD 70 (as presented in the Parable of the Tenants, Matthew 21:33–46, Mark 12:1–12, Luke 20:9–19), Peter’s teachings in Acts 2:40 and 1 Peter 2:4–10, and Moses’ prophecy in Deuteronomy 32. The chart organizes key themes—rejection of the Messiah (as Cornerstone/Rock), judgment on Israel, and the establishment of a new covenant nation.

Chart: Parallels in the Rejection of the Messiah, Judgment in AD 70, and the New Covenant Nation

Theme	Jesus: Parable of the Tenants (Matt. 21:33–46, Mark 12:1–12, Luke 20:9–19)	Peter: Acts 2:40, 1 Peter 2:4–10; 4:5-7, 17	Moses: Deuteronomy 32 (esp. vv. 4–5, 15–22, 20–43)
Rejection of the Messiah (Cornerstone/Rock)	Jesus cites Psalm 118:22–23, identifying Himself as the “stone the builders rejected” (Matt. 21:42). The tenants (Israel’s leaders) kill the son (Jesus), symbolizing their rejection of Him as the Cornerstone (Matt. 21:39).	Peter calls his generation “perverse” (Acts 2:40, echoing Deut. 32:5) for rejecting Christ. In 1 Pet. 2:4–8, he cites Psalm 118:22, portraying Christ as the “living stone” rejected by men but chosen by God, with unbelievers destined to stumble.	Israel rejects God as their “Rock” (Deut. 32:4, 15–18), a title applied to the Messiah. This foreshadows the rejection of Christ by the “perverse generation” (v. 20), leading to their downfall.
Judgment on Israel (AD 70)	The tenants face judgment: God will “put those wretches to a miserable death” (Matt. 21:41) and give the vineyard to others (v. 43). This points to Jerusalem’s destruction in AD 70 by Roman armies (Matt. 22:7), fulfilling Jesus’ prophecy of seeing Him in judgment (Matt. 23:39; Ps. 118:26).	Peter urges his audience to “be saved from this perverse generation” (Acts 2:40/Deut. 32:5), implying imminent judgment at Christ’s second coming in (Acts 2:20-21). In 1 Pet. 2:8, those who reject Christ are “destined” to stumble, aligning with the AD 70 judgment on Israel for rejecting the Cornerstone. Peter follows this with God being “ready to judged” and the “end of all things” being “near” at the “appointed time” (1 Pet. 4:5-7, 17).	Deuteronomy 32:21–22, 29–43 predicts Israel’s “end” through fire and divine vengeance for rejecting the Rock. This is fulfilled in AD 70 when Jerusalem is burned, marking the culmination of the “perverse generation’s” judgment (v. 20). Messiah / Jesus would come in “vengeance” and the “appointed time” would be “near” for God to “repay” and judge (Deut. 32:35-43 LXX).
New Covenant Nation Established	The kingdom is taken from Israel’s leaders and given to a “people producing its fruits” (Matt. 21:43), referring to the Church as the new covenant nation, fulfilling the transfer of stewardship post-AD 70.	Peter identifies believers as a “holy nation” and “royal priesthood” (1 Pet. 2:9), built on Christ the Cornerstone (1 Pet. 2:4–6). This new nation replaces old covenant Israel, fulfilling the promise of a fruit-bearing people (cf. Matt. 21:43).	Deuteronomy 32:21, 43 foresees “another Nation” rising as God’s people, provoked by Israel’s rebellion. This is fulfilled in the Church, which emerges as the new covenant nation post-AD 70, bearing fruit for God (cf. 1 Pet. 2:9).
Key Imagery	Vineyard (Israel), tenants (leaders), son (Christ), cornerstone (Ps. 118:22). Judgment is tied to rejecting the son, leading to the kingdom’s transfer.	Cornerstone (Christ), living stones (Church), perverse generation (Israel’s leaders). The Church is built as a spiritual house on Christ (1 Pet. 2:5).	Rock (God/Messiah), perverse generation, fire of judgment, new Nation. Israel’s rejection leads to a new people under God’s covenant.
Fulfillment Context	AD 70: Jerusalem’s destruction ends old covenant Israel’s role. The Church becomes the new covenant people, bearing fruit (Matt. 21:19, 43).	AD 70: Peter warns of Christ’s coming and judgment on his generation (Acts 2:20-40; 1 Pet. 4:5-7, 17) and establishes the Church as the new nation (1 Pet. 2:9), post-AD 70.	AD 70: Deuteronomy 32’s prophecy of Israel’s “end” (v. 29) and the rise of a new Nation (v. 21) is fulfilled in Jerusalem’s fall and the Church’s establishment.

Study Questions for The Parable of the Tenants

Understanding the Parable’s Core Message: What is the central message of the Parable of the Tenants as presented in Matthew 21:33–46, Mark 12:1–12, and Luke 20:9–19? How does Jesus use the parable to critique Israel’s religious leadership?
Synoptic Variations: Compare the accounts of the parable in Matthew, Mark, and Luke. How do the unique details in each Gospel (e.g., Matthew’s focus on the Pharisees, Mark’s vineyard description, Luke’s “long time”) enhance our understanding of the parable’s purpose?
Old Testament Echoes: The article highlights Isaiah 5:1–7 as a key background for the parable’s vineyard imagery. How does this Old Testament passage shape the parable’s portrayal of Israel as God’s vineyard, and what does it reveal about God’s expectations?
Symbolism in the Parable: Identify the key symbols in the parable (e.g., landowner, tenants, servants, son, vineyard). How do these symbols reflect the relationship between God, Israel’s leaders, the prophets, and Jesus?
The “Long Time” and Historical Context: The article interprets the “long time” (Luke 20:9) as the period from John the Baptist’s ministry (circa AD 27) to Jerusalem’s destruction in AD 70. How does Gary DeMar’s analysis of Matthew 24–25 support this interpretation, and why is this timeline significant?
Psalm 118 and the Cornerstone: Jesus quotes Psalm 118:22–23 to identify Himself as the “stone the builders rejected.” How does the article connect this to the events of AD 70, particularly the irony of Passover in Jerusalem as described by Josephus?
Deuteronomy 32 and the Song of Moses: According to the article, how does Deuteronomy 32:20–43 parallel the parable’s themes of rejecting the Messiah as the “Rock” and the rise of a new covenant nation? How does Peter apply this prophecy in Acts 2:40 and 1 Peter 2:4–10?
The New Covenant Nation: The parable concludes with the kingdom being given to a “people producing its fruits” (Matt. 21:43). How do the article and the chart demonstrate that this refers to the Church, and what role do Paul (Ephesians 2:14–22) and Peter (1 Peter 2:4–9) play in confirming this?
Judgment in AD 70: The article argues that the parable foreshadows Jerusalem’s destruction in AD 70. Using the chart, explain how Jesus, Peter, and Moses (in Deuteronomy 32) all point to this judgment, and what does this reveal about God’s justice?
Theological Implications: The article notes the parable’s “subversive edge” in exposing the absurdity of rejecting God’s Son. How does the imagery of the tenants’ power-hungry actions (e.g., seizing the vineyard) relate to the leaders’ behavior in Matthew 21:12–17 and 21:23–27?
Contemporary Application: The article warns that the Parable of the Tenants challenges us to bear fruit through faith in response to the claims of Christ and the Gospel. How does Jesus’ cursing of the fig tree (Matt. 21:18–19) and the judgment in AD 70 impact the call to the nations today to believe and come through the gates of the city in Revelation 22:2, 17?
Challenging Premillennialism: The article strongly critiques premillennialist views, particularly the claim that modern Israel’s formation in 1948 fulfills prophecy. Using the parable and the chart, explain why the author argues that old covenant Israel “never” bears fruit post-AD 70, and how does this impact eschatological debates?