No matter how we wish to interpret Matthew 16:27-28, we are bound by Daniel 7, which is the fountain from which Matthew 16 arises, to place its fulfillment during the days of the Roman Empire. Moreover, the Greek particle gar (G1063) grammatically connects Matthew 16:27 with the previous verses, making Jesus coming in the glory of the Father a judgment that vindicates not only his own persecution and death at the hands of the Jewish authorities, but also the sufferings and deaths of Jesus disciples. Verse-27 is offered them as hope for what Jesus has called them to endure. To place Jesus’ coming 2000 years into the future is to deny both the grammar and the context of Matthew 16.
Moreover, one of the most common errors of interpreting Matthew 16:28 is to make its fulfillment come in Jesus’ Transfiguration, which occurred only six days later, according to Matthew 17:1. While the Transfiguration is indeed a vision of Jesus in glory, it was not his coming, and Jesus did claim that some folks listening to him that day (verse-28) would live to see his coming in his Kingdom, not a vision of his glory. Interestingly, Mark’s version shows us that there was a large crowed of people with the disciples, listening to Jesus (Mark 8:34). So, it would seem to me to be disingenuous to say some listening to him that day would live to see Jesus coming in his Kingdom, if the Transfiguration is meant. After six days there is good reason to believe all of the people were still alive, certainly all of the disciples were alive. Yet, Jesus’ use of the word some (G5100) implies that the vast majority would not survive, including Jesus’ disciples.
To be sure, Matthew 17:1 begins with the conjunction and (kai – G2532), as does Mark 9:2, and the conjunction does, indeed, connect Jesus’ Transfiguration with his claim in Matthew 16:27 (Mark 9:1). Why do the Gospel writers do that, if the Transfiguration should be understood as the fulfillment of Jesus coming in the Kingdom in that generation?
Peter was one of the three apostles who witnessed Jesus’ Transfiguration, and he does mention it in his second epistle, but even he does not say it was the fulfillment of Jesus’ words in Matthew 16:28 (Mark 9:1). Scoffers had arisen who were denying and mocking the coming of Christ (2Peter 3:3), so Peter wrote his second epistle to defend what he had written in his first epistle (2Peter 3:1-3) about the nearness of Jesus’ coming (cf. 1Peter 1:5-7, 10-12, 20; 4:5, 7, 17).
Therefore, in 2Peter 1:16 Peter tells his readers that he and the other writers of the New Testament had not given them cunningly devised myths, as the Jews were apt to do (cf. Titus 1:14; 2Timothy 4:4). Rather, Peter claimed to be an eyewitness of Jesus’ glory (2Peter 1:16-17), which he saw in the ‘holy mount’ (2Peter 1:18), and all this served, not as its fulfillment, but as evidence for the more sure word of prophecy (2Peter 1:19).
Now consider what Peter saw. He claimed to see Jesus in glory and this was evidence he could use against the scoffers who were denying Jesus coming. Remember, if Jesus was predicting his coming 2000 years into the future, the scoffers’ argument would be illogical, because they were asking where was the promise of Jesus’ coming in the first century AD (2Peter 3:3). This question makes sense only if Peter was preaching that Jesus’ coming was near.
What did Peter see? He saw a vision of Jesus in glory with Moses and Elijah. Why Moses and Elijah? Because, they represent the Old Covenant—the Law and the Prophets. Peter misunderstood the vision and asked if he should make three tabernacles—one for Jesus and the others for Moses and Elijah. Then Peter heard the voice of God saying, ‘This is my beloved Son, him hear!” (Matthew 17:5; 2Peter 1:17-18). At that moment, both Elijah and Moses faded away—i.e. the Old Covenant faded away, and Jesus was left alone (Matthew 17:8; Mark 9:8; Luke 9:36).
Those who wish to place the fulfillment of Jesus’ words about some seeing Jesus coming in his Kingdom (Matthew 16:28) at the Transfiguration, also put Jesus actual coming in his Kingdom 2000 years later. Those who do this do two things. First, they keep the Old Covenant valid until the still future Second Coming, and, secondly, they end the Gospel age (the New Covenant age) with Jesus’ coming. So the Gospel (New Testament) ends when the Old Testament ends (according to the futurists). This is the logical end of their argument, but it is an illogical premise. How can they deny it?
Smoodock's Blog 
8 responses to “What Does the Transfiguration Tell Us?”
We deny things like this because it is what we have been ‘taught’, as you know. I find that teaching students to think is the real challenge as many prefer to be spoon fed. I have appreciated your additional writings on this subject. It really is appointed that each person will die. While I never got to the preterist conclusion, it was always illogical to me that Jesus would come a second time and in a form that was just like the Jews anticipated and still do; i.e. physical kingdom, rebuilding of the temple (sounds like the old covenant to me!) etc.
Thanks for your comment, Dave. I appreciate what you say here. Lord bless you.
Luke 17:20 Once, on being asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, Jesus replied, “The coming of the kingdom of God is not something that can be observed, 21 nor will people say, ‘Here it is,’ or ‘There it is,’ because the kingdom of God is in your midst.” [ Or “is within you” ]
Mark 4: 30 Again he said, “What shall we say the kingdom of God is like, or what parable shall we use to describe it? 31 It is like a mustard seed, which is the smallest of all seeds on earth. 32 Yet when planted, it grows and becomes the largest of all garden plants, with such big branches that the birds can perch in its shade.”
Jesus was the mustard seed, planted in the ground. The tree with such big branches is the Kingdom that we can each rest in today. Many of those that did walk the earth with Christ were lucky enough to see His glorious resurrection and the early growth of that tree, the newborn body of Christ, the early church.
The Kingdom is both here now and it is still coming. Of course, many have also died without realizing that the glory of God was within their grasp. One way or another, when the tree reaches full maturity, Jesus will return as promised and everyone, alive or dead, will have to give their own account.
The good news for those that have “seen” the Kingdom coming, that tree will become the Tree of Life, born of a tiny mustard seed, but blossomed into the very bride of Christ. And those that have faith like a mustard seed will be welcomed to live eternally with God, literally as sons of God. May our Lord come swiftly…
Greetings Gary, and thank you for reading and for your comment, although you don’t mention the Transfiguration.
Indeed, I intend to post a number of studies on the nature of the Kingdom of God beginning on Monday of next week, which can be found at: What Is the Nature of the Kingdom.
If memory serves, I don’t touch upon Jesus’ parables of the Kingdom in Matthew 13 or its parallels in Mark and Luke, but at a later date I will go into the parables of Jesus and their impact on how one should see the Kingdom of God, but that won’t be for another few months. Nevertheless, if memory serves, neither do I address the Kingdom parables of Matthew 13 in that series, at least not that of the Mustard Seed, because I was addressing their eschatology, not their nature in that series.
However, I have addressed the Parable of the Mustard Seed in an earlier study on Luke 13. You can find it in The Parable of the Mustard Seed. In essence, I see the parable differently than you do above. As a seed it was useful as a condiment, but as a tree it has become useful to the enemy — the birds nesting in the branches and stealing away the precious seed. It is an example of what happens over the years to complacent Israel of even the church for that matter.
Lord bless you, Gary, as you continue in the study of His word.
I really like the part when you said Moses and Elijah disappeared as a representative of the old Covenant disappearing.