Mathew 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.
Jesus is speaking to His disciples who are standing in front of Him!
When will dispensationalists ever give us a reasonable explanation of this one?
The answer is not difficult.
John and others who survived past AD70 lived to see the new covenant kingdom of Jesus, which began with the fall of Jerusalem.
And here you go: the biblically literate and correct answer....
The claim that Matthew 16:28 was fulfilled by the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70 is not demanded by the text and is extremely difficult to sustain in context.
Matthew 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.”
The issue is not whether some disciples survived until AD 70. The question is:
What event does Matthew himself place immediately after this prediction?
The answer is the
Transfiguration.
Jesus says that
some standing there would see the Son of Man in His Kingdom glory. Then:
Matthew 17:1–2
“And after six days Jesus taketh Peter, James, and John... and was transfigured before them: and his face did shine as the sun...”
The prophecy is given.
Six days pass.
Jesus selects exactly
three of those standing there.
They literally
see Christ unveiled in supernatural royal glory.
That fits Matthew 16:28 remarkably well.
Matthew 16:28 and 17:1 belong together
The modern chapter division can obscure the connection. Read them continuously:
“There be some standing here... till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom. And after six days Jesus taketh Peter, James, and John... and was transfigured before them.”
Nothing in Matthew 16:28 mentions Jerusalem, Rome, Titus, the Temple's destruction, or a covenantal transfer in AD 70.
Instead, Matthew immediately gives us a visible manifestation of Christ's glory.
Peter himself explains the Transfiguration
Peter later writes:
2 Peter 1:16–18
“We have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty... And this voice which came from heaven we heard, when we were with him in the holy mount.”
Notice Peter's language:
“power and coming”
“eyewitnesses”
“majesty”
“honour and glory”
Peter explicitly associates the Transfiguration with the glory of Christ's
coming.
The Transfiguration was therefore a preview or prophetic manifestation of the future Messianic Kingdom.
Peter does not point to AD 70.
He points to the
holy mountain.
Mark and Luke make the connection equally clear
Mark records:
Mark 9:1
“There be some of them that stand here, which shall not taste of death, till they have seen the kingdom of God come with power.”
Then immediately:
“And after six days Jesus taketh with him Peter, and James, and John... and he was transfigured before them.”
Luke likewise says:
Luke 9:27
“There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the kingdom of God.”
Then:
Luke 9:28
“And it came to pass about an eight days after these sayings, he took Peter and John and James...”
Luke specifically links the timing of the Transfiguration to “these sayings.”
All three Synoptic Gospels therefore place the Transfiguration immediately after this prophecy.
That is powerful contextual evidence.
“Some standing here” favors the Transfiguration
The objection is sometimes raised:
“Why would Jesus mention death if the fulfillment came only six days later?”
But Jesus did not say that only a few would
survive.
He said
some standing there would see the manifestation.
And exactly that occurs.
From the larger group Jesus selects:
Peter, James and John.
Those three see what the others do not.
The distinction is therefore between those who would
see the vision and those who would not, not necessarily between those who would live and those who would die.
Matthew 16:27 gives the larger context
The preceding verse is crucial:
Matthew 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.”
That is plainly eschatological.
Christ comes:
in the Father's glory,
with His angels,
and rewards every man.
That did not happen in AD 70.
There was no universal resurrection, no universal judgment, and no rewarding of every man according to his works.
Verse 28 therefore naturally means:
Some of you are about to receive an advance preview of that glory.
Six days later, they do.
Matthew 16:27 is the future reality.
Matthew 16:28–17:8 is the preview.
AD 70 does not resemble the promised Kingdom
The preterist interpretation requires:
“the Son of man coming in his kingdom”
to mean:
Roman armies destroying Jerusalem.
But the Transfiguration actually contains the proper imagery:
Christ glorified.
Christ radiant.
Christ majestic.
Glorified saints present.
The Father authenticating the Son.
Disciples literally seeing Him.
Which event better satisfies:
“they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom”?
The answer is evident from the narrative.
Furthermore, the OT Messianic Kingdom includes things that plainly did
not begin in AD 70:
- Messiah ruling from Zion — Isaiah 2:1–4; 11:1–10
- Israel restored spiritually and nationally — Ezekiel 36–37
- Jerusalem exalted, not destroyed — Zechariah 14
- Worldwide knowledge of the LORD — Isaiah 11:9
- Nations coming to Jerusalem to worship — Zechariah 14:16
- Israel dwelling securely under Messiah — Ezekiel 37:21–28
AD 70 produced almost the exact opposite:
Jerusalem was devastated.
The Temple was destroyed.
Israel was dispersed.
Gentile domination continued.
Messiah did not visibly reign from Jerusalem.
The nations did not stream to Zion.
Worldwide peace did not begin.
Calling AD 70 the beginning of the promised Messianic Kingdom therefore reverses the prophetic picture.
Jesus Himself places Jerusalem's judgment before future restoration
Jesus said:
Luke 21:24
“Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.”
Jerusalem's destruction and subjugation therefore belong to a continuing period of
Gentile domination, not the consummation of the Messianic Kingdom.
Likewise:
Matthew 23:39
“Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.”
There remains a future recognition of Messiah.
The contextual sequence is straightforward
Matthew 16:27 — Christ describes His future glorious coming.
Matthew 16:28 — He promises that some standing there will see the Son of Man in Kingdom glory.
Matthew 17:1–2 — six days later Peter, James and John see Christ transfigured in supernatural majesty.
2 Peter 1:16–18 — Peter later describes that very event as an eyewitness revelation of Christ's
“power and coming” and His
“majesty.”
No forty-year leap to AD 70 is required.
No Roman army needs to become “the Son of Man.”
No destruction of Jerusalem needs to be renamed the establishment of the Messianic Kingdom.
The inspired narrative supplies the explanation
six days later.
The Transfiguration was not the actual establishment of the Millennium. It was a proleptic preview of the glory of the future King and His Kingdom.
The preterist says:
“John lived until AD 70 and therefore saw Jesus come in His Kingdom.”
But Scripture never says that.
Scripture
does explicitly record Peter, James and John seeing Christ manifested in royal glory immediately after Jesus made the promise.
And Peter later tells us what that experience represented:
“the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ”
because they had been
“eyewitnesses of his majesty.”
That is not a dispensational escape hatch.
It is simply allowing
Matthew 17 to explain Matthew 16:28, and allowing
Peter himself to explain what he saw.
