Matthew 10:23

"But when they persecute you in this city, flee to the other; for verily I say to you, Ye shall not have completed the cities of Israel until the Son of man be come." (Matt. 10:23)

Preterists hold that the Lord’s address here was intended to be strictly personal to these first century Jewish disciples (including perhaps other contemporaries of whom these Jewish disciples may have been representative), indicating that they themselves would not have completed or exhausted the cities of Israel (in fulfilling their commission) until the Son of Man comes again. Further (they say), as these disciples themselves must have certainly exhausted the cities of Israel within their own lifetime during the first century (over approximately the next 40 years), therefore, the coming of the Son of Man must have been fulfilled in their lifetime—specifically in, or immediately after, the Roman destruction of Jerusalem, in 70AD.

Recall, “partial” Preterists hold to a non-literal, non-personal, non-physical, providential Second Coming of Christ in the Roman destruction of Jerusalem in 70AD; whereas “full” Preterists claim to hold to a literal (!), personal, physical Second Coming of Christ in, or immediately after, the Roman destruction of Jerusalem in 70AD. But, in either brand of Preterism, the kingdom inaugurated at His 70AD Second Coming is mysticalized/spiritualized. [Of course, the “partial” Preterist notion is also contradicted entirely, e.g., by Matt. 24:29-31. The Roman destruction of Jerusalem in 70AD cannot be the providential Second Coming; nor can it be the result of the providential Second Coming. For the coming of the Son of Man on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory is declared by Scripture to take place after—immediately after—”the tribulation of those days,” which, in the spiritual alchemy of Preterism, is the very destruction of Jerusalem in 70AD. To thus teach that the destruction of Jerusalem takes place after the destruction of Jerusalem is utter nonsense!]

And it has already been demonstrated at some length that the Preterist approach or methodology is a selective, isolated, pseudo-literal one (2 Pet. 1:20), which reads into their select texts that which cannot be found there or anywhere else in God’s Word, and which mysticalizes the kingdom, and overthrows the genuinely plain, normal, literal sense of all other prophetic scriptures—including, e.g., the myriad of OT prophecies, and the very Olivet Discourse itself and the book of Revelation as a whole—bearing on the future of Israel, the promised kingdom, the coming of Christ, etc, etc. As such, the Preterist take on Matt. 10:23, e.g., is completely illegitimate and cannot possibly be true.

Another point to note is this: Preterists mysticalize Daniel's 70^th week/the Tribulation Period/Matt. 24 of the Olivet Discourse as referring to the destruction of Jerusalem in 70AD, based on their selective, isolated, pseudo-literal eisegesis of Matt. 10:23 (24:34, 16:28, and 26:64), which they imagine requires the Lord to have returned specifically in 70AD (which has been shown to be absolutely false and unsupportable). Further, this is a blatant case of circular reasoning. For Preterists mysticalize Matt. 24 of the Olivet Discourse based on their view of Matt. 10:23 (along with 24:34, 16:28, and 26:64); but they justify their 70AD view of Matt. 10:23 (24:34, 16:28, and 26:64) based on their mysticalizing of Matt. 24 of the Olivet Discourse!

There are, of course, only two options in understanding this text: a false one (of which there could be many) and the true one.

(A) False Option: The Preterist view has been shown, and will further be shown, to represent a false option, which entails an eisegetical interpretation in isolation from all other scripture revelation on the subject (including the Olivet Discourse itself), and particularly as to the nature of the kingdom (i.e., each and every single OT covenant, prophecy, promise to His earthly people Israel concerning a literal earthly kingdom is mysticalized or alchemized into a mere “spiritual” kingdom). The Preterist view, therefore, in no way follows a genuinely literal interpretation. It is an eisegetical, isolated, and thus a gravely erroneous and pseudo-literal interpretation.

(B) The True Option: Matt. 10:23 is parallel to, and identical with, the same period of time covered by Matthew 24 of the Olivet Discourse—which has been shown to be, necessarily, the post-70AD and thus yet future Tribulation Period/70^th week of Daniel. As such, the mission of preaching this gospel of the kingdom (Matt. 10:7; 24:14)—i.e., “Repent, for the kingdom of the heavens,” to be literally established on earth, “is at hand” (cf. Matt. 3:2; 4:17; 4:23; 9:35; Mark 1:14-15; Luke 10:9, 11; 4:43; Acts 3:17-21; a gospel, or good news, which has not been heralded since the days covered by the Gospels and the first few chapters of the book of Acts)—will be resumed, during future 70^th week of Daniel (Matt. 24:14), through a future Jewish remnant, represented by these Jewish disciples whom the Lord was then addressing prophetically. (The mystery interval or parenthesis of God’s heavenly purpose, involving the Church, Christ’s Body and Bride, is not seen at all in Matt. 10, as it was as of yet unrevealed.) This is in perfect accord with all other scripture revelation on the subject (2 Pet. 1:20), including the nature of the kingdom, and is thus the correct and genuine literal interpretation.

 In light of all that has been set forth and established under the discussions of Matt. 24:34 and Matt. 16:28, the only thing that need be demonstrated at this point, really, is the clear and definite time-link between Matt. 10:23 and Matt. 24 of the Olivet Discourse (which even Preterists acknowledge). . . that Matt. 10:23 is parallel to, and identical with, the same period of time covered by Matt. 24 (Mark 13 and Luke 21:8-11, 25-36) of the Olivet Discourse—which we have conclusively shown to be, necessarily, the post-70AD, and thus yet future, Tribulation Period/70^th week of Daniel (the reader is directed to the discussions under Matt. 24:34 and Matt. 16:28 for careful consideration in this regard; particularly on the key bearing of Matt. 24:15 and Luke 21:12).  Therefore, the coming of the Son of Man in Matt. 10:23 and Matt. 24:29-31 must be fulfilled sometime subsequent to 70AD . . . and after the accomplishment of the 70^th week of Daniel.

As such, even the selective, isolated, pseudo-literal Preterist view of Matt. 10:23 must be fulfilled sometime subsequent to 70AD . . . in connection with the accomplishment of the 70^th week of Daniel, whenever that might be.

This leads to the next point (before the time-link between Matt. 10:23 and Matthew 24 of the Olivet Discourse is set forth and established) . . .

"But when they persecute you in this city, flee to the other; for verily I say to you, Ye shall not have completed the cities of Israel until the Son of man be come." (Matt. 10:23)

Assuming for the sake of argument that the absurd Preterist view of Matt. 10:23 is correct—insofar as, the Lord’s address here was intended to be strictly personal to these Jewish disciples (including perhaps other contemporaries of whom these Jewish disciples may have been representative, but not as also representative of a yet future Jewish remnant), indicating that they themselves would not have completed the kingdom commission and cities of Israel until the time that the Son of Man comes—it still in no way entails Preterism; i.e., the coming of the Son of Man and establishment of His kingdom in the destruction of Jerusalem in 70AD. For Matt. 10:23 says not one word as to when “the Son of Man comes”; though it has been conclusively shown (see discussions under Matt. 24:34 and Matt. 16:28) that it would have to be sometime subsequent to 70AD . . . and after the accomplishment of the 70^th week of Daniel, whenever that might be. Preterism/”70ADism” is thus absolutely ruled out.

Further, there is absolutely no statement or promise of the Lord in Matt. 10:23, or anywhere else for that matter, which indicates that these first century Jewish disciples whom the Lord addressed would in fact or did in fact complete the kingdom commission and cities of Israel in their life time during the first century—with the specific gospel or good news of the kingdom (Matt. 10:7; 24:14), i.e., “Repent, for the kingdom of the heavens,” to be literally established on earth, “is at hand.” (All such preterizing notions have been assumed and read into the text without any scriptural basis whatsoever.) Too, there is not one word anywhere in scripture which indicates that the next generation of disciples would take up and complete the kingdom commission and cities of Israel. Nor is there one word in Matt. 10:23 which indicates that these first century Jewish disciples would be “kept from dying” until 70AD, or that they would be “kept from dying” only until 70AD.

Rather (still assuming for the sake of argument the basic correctness of the Preterist view), the Lord’s declaration in Matt. 10:23 simply requires that these Jewish disciples not have completed the kingdom commission and cities of Israel “until the Son of Man comes.” But He gives not the slightest suggestion as to when He would come (certainly not in 70AD).

As such, this yet leaves two possibilities . . . actually the only two tenable positions (though there can be a slight variation of a detail or two within the scenarios of these only two tenable positions) . . . that Preterists may adopt, and one of which they must adopt, under their absurd, isolated, pseudo-literal view of Matt. 10:23 (i.e., insofar as, the Lord’s address here was intended to be strictly personal to these first century Jewish disciples, indicating that they themselves would not have completed the kingdom commission and cities of Israel until the Son of Man comes again):

(1) That is, the Lord's affirmation entails that He would, and has, miraculously kept some of these Jewish disciples (including the very same Jewish disciples to whom the promise of Matt. 16:28 pertained) alive for the past 2,000 years and will continue to do so until they return shortly before the coming of the Son of Man on the clouds of heaven in power and great glory—i.e., return sometime during the future Tribulation Period/70^th week of Daniel—in order to complete the kingdom commission and cities of Israel by the time the Son of Man comes. Where are they being kept alive? The text does not say, but they are presumably in Paradise/the third heaven. Thus, the Lord (in making good on His affirmation that these Jewish disciples would not have completed or exhausted the cities of Israel “until the Son of Man comes”) had some of these Jewish disciples taken up to heaven at some point (perhaps prior to, or upon, His ascension), and has been miraculously keeping them alive as such for the past 2,000 years—until they return to this earth during Daniel’s 70^th week to complete the kingdom commission and cities of Israel by the time the Son of Man returns to establish His literal kingdom on this earth. (At which time, these Jewish disciples would then be allowed to finally taste of death, so as to then be immediately resurrected to enter the earthly kingdom in their glorified bodies.) This would likewise satisfy the Preterist view of both Matt. 16:28 and Matt. 24:34 as well.

Or (slight variation), the Lord's affirmation entails that He would, and has, miraculously kept some of these Jewish disciples (including the very same Jewish disciples to whom the promise of Matt. 16:28 pertained) alive for the past 2,000 years and will continue to do so until they return with the Son of Man coming to establish His literal kingdom on earth after the future Tribulation Period/70th week of Daniel—in order to complete the kingdom commission and cities of Israel. Where are they being kept alive? The text does not say, but they are presumably in Paradise/the third heaven. Thus, the Lord (in making good on His affirmation that these Jewish disciples would not have completed or exhausted the cities of Israel “until the Son of Man comes”) had some of these Jewish disciples taken up to heaven at some point (perhaps prior to, or upon, His ascension), and has been miraculously keeping them alive as such for the past 2,000 years—until they return to this earth with the Son of Man after Daniel’s 70^th week to complete the kingdom commission and cities of Israel. (At which time, these Jewish disciples would then be allowed to finally taste of death, so as to then be immediately resurrected to enter the earthly kingdom in their glorified bodies.) This would likewise satisfy the Preterist view of both Matt. 16:28 and Matt. 24:34 as well.

(2) All of these Jewish disciples (except for those to whom the promise of Matt. 16:28 pertained) did die in the first century. The Lord's affirmation thus entails that they return shortly before the coming of the Son of Man on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory—i.e., they return sometime during the future Tribulation Period/70^th week of Daniel (those who had died return in resurrected bodies)—in order to complete the kingdom commission and cities of Israel by the time the Son of Man comes, heralding the gospel or good news that the literal kingdom of the heavens is “at hand.” As such, these Jewish disciples indeed will not have completed or exhausted the cities of Israel “until the Son of Man comes.” (At which time they would enter the established earthly kingdom in their resurrected/glorified bodies.)

Or (slight variation), all of these disciples (except for those to whom the promise of Matt. 16:28 pertained) did die in the first century. The Lord's affirmation thus entails that they return with the Son of Man coming to establish His literal kingdom on earth after the future Tribulation Period/70th week of Daniel (those who had died return in resurrected bodies)—in order to complete the kingdom commission and cities of Israel, heralding the gospel or good news that the literal kingdom of the heavens is, no longer merely “at hand,” but now arrived. As such, these Jewish disciples indeed will not have completed or exhausted the cities of Israel “until the Son of Man comes.” (At which time they would enter the established earthly kingdom in their resurrected/glorified bodies.)

These two positions (with whatever slight variation is espoused) are the only two tenable ones that Preterists may adopt, and one of which they must adopt, under their absurd, isolated, pseudo-literal view of Matt. 10:23. But either one is a self-defeating position! For Preterism/70ADism is thus absolutely ruled out by the very Preterist view of Matt. 10:23!

Therefore, either, one of these two positions represents the true fulfillment of Matt. 10:23—in which case Preterism/70ADism disproves itself . . . collapses of its own weight . . . perishes in the ash heap; or the true position is that which recognizes that the Lord here spoke prophetically to His Jewish disciples as also representative, necessarily, of a yet future Jewish remnant during Daniel’s 70^th week, who would finally resume and complete the earthly kingdom commission (as set forth below)—in which case, again, Preterism/70ADism is sent packing to return to never never land. Either way, Futurism is the end result!

Given the Preterist mysticalizing methodology in approaching the scriptures, it is impossible for that system to conclusively disprove, either logically or biblically, the self-defeating positions outlined above. It would be interesting and instructive to behold the manner of their attempt!

Now . . .

As stated earlier, Matt. 10:23 is parallel to, and identical with, the same period of time covered by Matthew 24 of the Olivet Discourse (which even Preterists acknowledge)—which we have conclusively shown to be, necessarily, the post-70AD and thus yet future Tribulation Period/70^th week of Daniel. As such, the mission of preaching this gospel of the kingdom (Matt. 10:7; 24:14)—i.e., “Repent, for the kingdom of the heavens” to be literally established on earth “is at hand” (a gospel, or good news, which has not been heralded since the days covered by the Gospels and the first few chapters of the book of Acts)—will be resumed, during future 70^th week of Daniel (Matt. 24:14), through a future Jewish remnant, represented by these Jewish disciples/apostles whom the Lord was then addressing prophetically.

“Then [At that time] shall they deliver you up to tribulation, and shall kill you; and ye will be hated of all the nations for my name's sake. . . . But he [the elect, godly Jew] that has endured to the end [the end of the completion of the age, the Tribulation Period/70^th week of Daniel], he shall be saved [physically delivered to enter the Millennial Kingdom upon its establishment, as part of the new nation of Israel, never to taste of death; see also Matt. 24:22, 31]. And these glad tidings of the kingdom shall be preached in the whole habitable earth for a witness to all the nations [the Gentiles], and then shall come the end.” (Matt. 24:9, 13-14)

“But brother shall deliver up brother to death, and father child; and children shall rise up against parents and cause them to be put to death. And ye will be hated of all on account of my name; but he [the elect, godly Jew] that has endured to the end [the end of the completion of the age, the Tribulation Period/70^th week of Daniel], he shall be saved [physically delivered to enter the Millennial Kingdom upon its establishment, as part of the new nation of Israel, never to taste of death; see also Mark 13:20, 27].” (Mark 13:12-13)

“But brother shall deliver up brother to death, and father child; and children shall rise up against parents and shall put them to death; and ye shall be hated of all on account of my name. But he [the elect, godly Jew] that has endured to the end [the end of the completion of the age, the Tribulation Period/70^th week of Daniel], he shall be saved [physically delivered to enter the Millennial Kingdom upon its establishment, as part of the new nation of Israel, never to taste of death]. But when they persecute you in this city, flee to the other; for verily I say to you, Ye shall not have completed the cities of Israel until the Son of man be come." (Matt. 10:22-23)

“In reality, Matt. 10:22 refers to the Jewish remnant as does Matt. 24:13.”

“Matt. 10:22b and 24:13 are the same. The preaching of Matt. 10:23 is bound up with the epoch of the coming of the Son of Man in glory [i.e., post-70AD and yet future completion of Daniel’s 70^th week].”

“John [the Baptist] and our Lord preached the coming of the kingdom that the OT prophesied. Indeed, our Lord sent the twelve out with the same message (Matt.10:7). Matt. 10:23 definitely connects this testimony with the epoch of the coming of the Son of Man. Now note well that 10:22b and 24:13 are the same. Both of these passages have in view the epoch of the coming of the Son of Man.”

“The word ‘end,’ telos, is used three times [in Matt. 24] (vv. 6, 13, 14). The end has reference to Messiah's appearance for the deliverance of the [godly Jewish] remnant. Those that endure this terrible time know that it is of measured duration and that holding fast the expectation of Messiah's coming will result in deliverance when He comes. Of course, there will be martyrs, but for those not martyred the end will come, and they will be saved from the oppressors. [Matt. 24] Verse 13 does not refer to a Christian enduring to the end of his life in the sense of remaining loyal to Christ until he dies. Not only is this verse pressed into false use by Arminians; but the Calvinist and amillennialist W. Hendriksen, who applies vv 4-12 to the entire present period, claims v. 13 applies to a Christian's remaining loyal to Christ and entering glory! All of this is peculiar exposition. Why not treat the passage as a whole instead of changing subjects? The words, the end, refer to the question raised in v. 3 about the completion of the age. The ‘beginning of throes’ (v. 8) is not the end (v. 6); it . . . is introductory to the completion of the age. ‘And if those days {of the great tribulation} had not been cut short, no flesh had been saved’ (v. 22). ‘But he that has endured to the end, he shall be saved!' (v. 13). There is nothing difficult here and we need not ransack history about it. It is a question of enduring through the beginning of throes, and through the great tribulation, and through the completion of the age. Such will have their flesh saved. Such will be delivered (Dan. 12:1). It is even the time of Jacob's trouble; but he shall be saved out of it (Jer. 30:7). And thus those who are children of God will enter into millennial blessedness, on earth. It is, then, a matter of deliverance for godly Jews, not a question of perseverance of Christians. It is a matter of FLESH being saved, not of souls being saved and entering glory above.”

“We noted before that the preaching of the 12 per Matt. 10:23 is bound up with the epoch of the coming of the Son of Man. Meanwhile, however, the mystery form of the kingdom (i.e., an aspect kept secret until it was declared by our Lord, Matt.13) is present now. But during Daniel’s 70^th week, which is just prior to the restoration of the kingdom to Israel, this gospel of the kingdom [Matt. 10:7 and 24:14], i.e., that the kingdom of the heavens is at hand, shall again go forth through a faithful remnant of Israel. This time, however, the kingdom will be manifested in power. . . . There will be Gentiles brought into blessing through the preaching of this gospel of the kingdom [Matt. 24:14]. These are seen in Rev. 7:13-17. They are said to “come out of the great tribulation” [Rev. 7] (v.14). Such are also found in Matt. 25:34-40.”—R.A. Huebner (Elements of Dispensational Truth, Vol. 2, pp. 176, 188, 189, 191, 192)

“It [the mission of preaching this gospel of the kingdom (Matt. 10:7; 24:14), i.e., “Repent, for the kingdom of the heavens” to be literally established on earth “is at hand”] will be taken up again [during the completion of the age, Daniel’s 70^th week (Matt. 24:14), through a Jewish remnant, as represented by the Jewish disciples/apostles whom the Lord was then addressing] . . . in the face of bitter persecution, and continued until the actual coming of the Son of Man from heaven and the consequent deliverance of His own [His own godly Jewish remnant] at a yet future time. . . . The occurrence of the same exhortation and encouragement with the distinct and detailed prophecy of the coming of the Son of Man, in the twenty-fourth chapter, assures us as to the meaning here [in Matt.10:22-23]. Again there we are told that ‘he that endureth to the end shall be saved,’ the special troubles of the last days are put before us, and the Lord’s coming at the end ‘with all His holy angels with Him.’ But even as to the meaning of this, many have gone astray; while the lack of understanding of the parenthetical nature of the present Christian time has necessarily confounded things which should have been kept far apart.”—F.W. Grant (The Numerical Bible)

“[Matt. 10] Verse 23 tells us of an unfinished testimony. . . . The coming of the Son of Man is His second coming. Before He comes again the gospel of the kingdom will be preached once more both in Israel’s land and also among all nations (Matt. 24:14). The heralds in the future will again be a company of believing Jewish disciples. The predications concerning persecution and tribulation will then all be finally fulfilled in that period of time, which is called ‘the great tribulation’ (24:21). The true Church will then be no longer on earth. Before [Daniel’s 70^th week and] that time of trouble comes, preceding the visible coming of Christ, the Church will be gathered home [to the Father’s house, in heaven] to be with Christ (1 Thess. 4:13-18).”—A.C. Gaebelein (Gaebelein’s Concise Commentary on the Whole Bible)

[Note: The fact that there is a degree of similarity between some of the events leading up to the Roman destruction of Jerusalem in 70AD and some of the events of the yet future Tribulation Period/70^th week of Daniel (e.g., cp. Luke 21:16-17 with Mark 13:12-13a, Matt. 10:21-22a, and Matt. 24:9), does not and cannot change the fact (which was conclusively demonstrated under the discussion of Matt. 24:34) that the events leading up to and including the Roman destruction of Jerusalem in 70AD (Luke 21:12-24) necessarily occur an indefinite amount of time “before” the fulfillment of “all these things” (Luke 21:12) of the yet future Tribulation Period/70^th week of Daniel (i.e., before all these things of Luke 21:8-11, 25-36, Matt. 24 and Mark 13 of the Olivet Discourse). Thus, this degree of similarity demonstrates nothing more than that the former, in certain respects, is a foreshadowing of the latter, i.e., of that which is yet to come.]

A further word seems to be in order concerning this gospel of the kingdom (cf. Matt. 10:7; 24:14; 3:2; 4:17; 4:23; 9:35; Mark 1:14-15; Luke 10:9, 11; 4:43; Acts 3:17-21) in contradistinction to the gospel of the grace of God. [Take note: According to such Synoptic Gospel passages as Luke 18:34, 9:45, Matt. 16:22, Mark. 9:10, 9:32, even the apostles themselves were unable to understand the fact and significance of our Lord’s death and resurrection (in fact, Luke states that the meaning was “hidden from them”); as such, the disciples, prior to our Lord’s death and resurrection, certainly could not have exercised faith in Him as the Crucified and Risen One, nor could they have called on anyone else to do so in the gospel of the kingdom they were then preaching. Thus, the gospel of the kingdom (“Repent, for the kingdom of the heavens is at hand”) must contain or consist of other ”good news”—good news other than that of the atoning death and resurrection of the Lord of glory, though it be, of course, based on it. Surely there is no professing Christian today who is going around preaching: “Repent, for the kingdom of the heavens is at hand”?!]

“Much heat without light has been generated by those set against dispensational truth concerning what the gospel of the kingdom is, almost going so far as to say we teach ‘another gospel’ (Gal. 1) when we say that ‘this gospel of the kingdom’ is not the gospel of the grace of God [of which there is indeed only one such gospel (Gal. 1, 1 Cor. 15)].”

“It shows grave ignorance of the gospel of the grace of God to confound the two [i.e., to confound it with the gospel of the kingdom]. They are as different as it is to take a people out of this world to be like Christ in glory above and to establish a kingdom in manifestation on earth with earthly blessings for His earthly people.”

“Here some remarks on this bogus charge regarding the dispensational view of the word ‘gospel’ are taken form W. Kelly: ‘The Christian can understand and sympathise with the jealousy which takes fire at the idea of preaching any other gospel than that which an apostle preached; as if there could be salvation save by grace through faith, and that not of ourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest any man should boast. But if we heard one quoting Gal. 1 to show that the very same thing was meant by the gospel there, by the gospel of the kingdom (Matt. 24:14), by that which was preached to Zacharias (Luke 1:19), to Abraham (Gal. 3:8), to Israel in the wilderness (Heb. 4:2), to Paul (1 Thess. 3:6), to God's servants, the prophets (Rev. 10:7), as well as by the everlasting gospel in Rev. 14:6, we should feel that eujaggevlion and eujaggelivzw were unscripturally limited through our conventional usage of the word ‘gospel’ in English; and so the profit was missed of the distinct force in each of the applications of the term in the perfect word of God. The truth of the case beyond question is, that the word ‘gospel’ is used there in a far wider manner than is common with us, who confine it to the word of salvation through the faith of the Lord Jesus Christ. In that sense there can be none other; and such is the meaning in Gal., where the apostle utterly denies a different gospel which is not another. There can be none, save that of the grace of Christ Who gave Himself for our sins. . . .But, that the word eujaggevlion (gospel) and the corresponding verb are applied in scripture to many other glad tidings, besides those of salvation through the death and resurrection of the Saviour, is beyond a doubt to an unprejudiced mind. The scriptures, already referred to, set this at rest. . . .But the pre-evangelisation to Abram, that all the nations should be blessed in him, is a very different message from that which the Lord in the days of His flesh commissioned the twelve to preach, when He said, "Go not in the way of the Gentiles." Nor can the gospel of the grace of God, which now gathers Jew and Greek for heavenly glory, be rightly confounded with the everlasting gospel which the angel is by-and-by to preach, saying, "Fear God and give glory to Him, for the hour of His judgment is come." God will then send to the Gentile world the simple tidings of the bruised woman's Seed as the vanquisher of Satan, backed up by the message of judgment at the door. In fine, as a question of salvation, there can be but one gospel; while in another and in its place an important sense, repeatedly enunciated in God's word, there are many glad tidings, whose several bearings must be admitted, if we would be wise in the dispensations of God.’ ”

“[The] disciples did not understand what the Lord meant by His death and resurrection. Read again Matt 16:22; Mark 9:32; Luke 9:45; 18:34; 19:11; 24:21. The opposers of dispensational truth unite in asserting that this gospel of the kingdom and the gospel of the grace of God are the same. What is the result? Why, that the 12 disciples proclaimed the gospel of the grace of God as recorded in Matt. 10:5ff. And what, think you, in the light of the above scriptures, was the content of their message, they not understanding the death, bloodshedding and resurrection of Christ? . . . The Lord Jesus also preached that the kingdom of the heavens was at hand (Matt 4:17), i.e., the gospel of the kingdom (Matt 4:23). It was only just before His transfiguration that He began to tell His disciples of His impending death and resurrection (Mark 9:31). We are not told in the Scriptures, and so faith knows nothing about it (Rom 10:17), that Christ proclaimed His rejection, death, bloodshedding, and resurrection as part of this good news of the kingdom. Yet all of this is embraced within the gospel of the grace of God, plus much more. . . . These considerations show us that the preaching of the kingdom of the heavens as at hand was the announcement of the kingdom prophesied by the prophets. It is the earthly reign of Messiah in majesty.”

“Who [today] is preaching, ‘Repent, for the kingdom of the heavens is drawn nigh’? Our Lord told the twelve, ‘And as ye go, preach, saying, the kingdom of the heavens has drawn nigh’ (Matt. 10:7). . . . [Preaching] things concerning the kingdom as a moral sphere, or as the coming sphere of Christ’s glory, [in no way translates into the idea that] . . . Paul [or we today] preached ‘the gospel of the kingdom’—that the kingdom of the heavens has drawn nigh”.

“[Yes,] Paul preached the kingdom. That is not the same thing as preaching the gospel of the kingdom. That seems a rather elementary distinction. Do those who equate the two seriously think that Paul preached, ‘repent, for the kingdom of the heavens has drawn nigh'?

“[J.N. Darby:] ‘It is a question there of the gospel [of the kingdom] that Jesus preached during His lifetime, as well as John the Baptist; it is not the gospel of the death and resurrection of Jesus (that is to say, a work of eternal redemption fully accomplished), but the solemn fact that the kingdom was going to be established; it is the ‘everlasting gospel.’ The Lord was about to begin to break the serpent's head by the establishment of this kingdom, to take in hand His great power and act as King. This testimony is to be rendered after the catching up of the church and before the manifestation of the Lord. The testimony rendered to the Jews is found in Rev. 11; but here we learn that it will be heard also in the entire world before the end comes.’ ”

“[J.N. Darby:] ‘Now whatever analogy of principle there may be in the Lord's dealings (and I think there is), I believe strictly this is put in contrast with what we call the gospel. The death and resurrection of Christ could not be preached as the gospel [by the disciples] before He was crucified and risen (previous to that His death was man's sin, though it were God's purpose); in the resurrection it could, because God had received it as atonement; but even Peter preaches it as their sin, and speaks of His return on their repentance, until further things came in. Stephen's death was the point of change as to this; but this gospel of the kingdom was, that the kingdom of heaven was at hand, that God was going to set up His kingdom, though from heaven, among the Jews, in the person of His Son, even the Lord Jesus Christ; and this was to be preached to the Gentiles before He did it [Mat.. 24:14], for this would be the end, and the Lord would, as He always does, send the testimony before He did the fact. It is this gospel of the kingdom, then, that is to be preached before the end comes of Jewish circumstances {in which the remnant finds itself} to Jewish disciples, and this to the nations.’ ”

“The fact that the gospel of the kingdom did not include the death, resurrection, and ascension of Christ into glory does not mean that therefore when the gospel of the kingdom is [resumed and] preached in the future, these momentous facts will not be noted. But the character of the preaching then is in view of Messiah's coming in glory to set up the kingdom prophesied by the prophets of Israel. That is the form the preaching will have. Now, who is it that preaches 'Repent, for the kingdom of the heavens has drawn nigh'? Do those who equate the two do so? Why not, since they claim they are the same?”

“We ought to know that the gospel of the kingdom is not the gospel committed now, without our text even having said ‘this gospel.’ By ‘this gospel’ our Lord spoke of the gospel John preached (Matt. 3:1-4) and that He Himself preached (Matt. 4:23). Indeed, it was this gospel that the disciples to whom He was then speaking had themselves preached (Matt. 10:7). . . . In the future, the godly Jews will thus preach. It is ‘this gospel,’ these glad tidings; namely, repent, for the kingdom of the heavens has drawn near. It is 'this gospel' that the disciples had themselves preached while the Lord was here, as part of a godly Jewish remnant. Though the past preachers of it were incorporated into the church [on the day of Pentecost, after the death, resurrection, ascension of Christ into glory, and the consequent sending down of the Holy Spirit from heaven], a future godly Jewish remnant will take up this gospel again. Matt. 24:14 is express about it, and that it will go out to the nations of the world for a witness.”—R.A. Huebner (Elements of Dispensational Truth, Vol. 2, pp. 188-191, 306, 309, 310)

One final note: the future godly Jewish remnant who will take up this gospel of the kingdom again during Daniel’s 70th week, will not and never will be part of the Church, Christ’s heavenly Body and Bride—which is comprised exclusively of all believers saved from the day of Pentecost to the Pre-Tribulation/Pre-70th Week Rapture, at which time the heavenly Church is completed. All who form part of this heavenly Body are in union with Christ the Head in the heavenlies—they are “in Christ,” wherein is neither Jew nor Gentile before God, in terms of standing, position, blessings. The Lord’s Jewish disciples, part of the then earthly Jewish remnant, who preached the gospel of the kingdom for a time, were baptized by the Holy Spirit into Christ, to form one Body in Him—on the day of Pentecost, after the death, resurrection, ascension of Christ into glory, and the consequent sending down of the Holy Spirit from heaven—and thus ceased to be earthly/Jewish in standing and position before God, in Christ Jesus. But this will never be so of the future godly Jewish remnant of Daniel’s 70^th week, who will never cease to be Jews in terms of earthly standing, position, blessings. They will never be incorporated into the heavenly Church (completed at the Rapture)—and there is not one verse of scripture to suggest otherwise. To the contrary, they will compose the new and true spiritual nation of Israel in the Millennial Kingdom, under their Messiah and their New Covenant.

James M Ventilato
December 28, 2004
Updated: July 4, 2013

Back to Table of Contents
Back to Problems with Reformed Theology
Back to Doctrinal Studies
Home Page