Matthew 16:27–28
“For the Son of Man will come in the glory of His Father with His angels, and then He will reward each according to his works. Assuredly, I say to you, there are some standing here who shall not taste death till they see the Son of Man coming in His kingdom.” (Matt. 16:27–28)
This is one of the clearest passages about the timing of the Second Coming in the New Testament. It’s so clear, in fact, that it hardly seems possible there could be any debate about it. In verse 27, Jesus says the Son of Man will come in the Father’s glory; and in verse 28, Jesus again mentions the coming of the Son of Man and says it will happen before his audience members pass away. It doesn’t get much clearer than this.
Matthew 16:27–28 = Matthew 25:31–34
Some people try to get around this argument by claiming that Matthew 16:27–28 is not talking about the Second Coming; rather, it refers to the Transfiguration (or the Ascension, or Pentecost). I will address each of these possibilities in detail below, but for now, let me point out that Matthew 16:27–28 describes the same event as Matthew 25:31–34, which everyone agrees is the Second Coming! Compare the descriptive elements in the passages:
Both passages contain the same elements: the Son of Man, coming, in glory, with angels, to reward the faithful, in Jesus’s kingdom. They are even listed in the same order!
Moreover, Jesus uttered both statements in approximately the same time period. So if Jesus had two different events in mind, he surely would have said so to avoid confusion. He certainly would not have used the same descriptive elements, yet had a different event in mind.
Furthermore, both statements are recorded in the same book of Matthew, just a few chapters apart. So if these were different events, Matthew, too, would have told us!
It’s obvious that both passages refer to the same event. And since Matthew 25:31–34 is about the Second Coming—and everyone admits it is—then so is Matthew 16:27–28!
Matthew 16:27–28 = Matthew 24:30–34
Matthew 16:27–28 is also linked to the destruction of the temple in AD 70. Compare Matthew 16:27–28 to Matthew 24:30–34:
Both accounts contain the same elements: the Son of Man, coming, in glory, with angels, in his kingdom. The elements are even listed in the same order!
Moreover, both accounts give the exact same first-century fulfillment time frame. Matthew 16 says it would happen within the lifetimes of Jesus’ first-century audience, and Matthew 24 says it would happen within “this generation.” Note: a biblical generation equates to forty years (Heb. 3:8–10, Num. 14:30–34, Neh. 9:21).
Matthew 16 and 24 are clearly describing the same coming. And in Matthew 24, Jesus linked his coming to the destruction of the temple (Matt. 24:2, 30, 34), which historians agree happened in AD 70. Therefore, this is when Matthew 16 must have happened too.
Matthew 16:27–28 = Mark 8:38–9:1
Another way to show Matthew 16:27–28 was fulfilled in the first century is by comparing it to Mark’s parallel account, in which Jesus says:
“For whoever is ashamed of Me and My words in this adulterous and sinful generation, of him the Son of Man also will be ashamed when He comes in the glory of His Father with the holy angels…Assuredly, I say to you that there are some standing here who will not taste death till they see the kingdom of God present with power” (Mark 8:38–9:1, bolding mine).
Notice how Jesus says “this adulterous and sinful generation” would see the Son of Man coming. We can be sure Jesus is referring to his generation (in the first century) because Jesus often chastised his contemporaries this way. For example, in Matthew 12:39 he called his contemporaries an “adulterous generation”; and in Matthew 17:17 he called his contemporaries a “faithless, perverse generation.” The apostles, too, repeatedly referred to their contemporaries in this way. For instance, in Acts 2:40, Peter preached “be saved from this perverse generation”; and in Philippians 2:14–15, Paul told his audience to “do all things without complaining…in the midst of a crooked and perverse generation.”
It is this sinful generation that would witness Jesus’s Second Coming described in Mark 8:38–9:1. And, since commentators agree that Matthew 16:27-28 is the parallel account, then it too must have been fulfilled in the first century.
Alternative Interpretation #1: Matthew 16:27–28 refers to the Transfiguration
Some commentators try to get around the straightforward interpretation of Matthew 16:27–28—in which Jesus said his Second Coming would happen within the lifetimes of his audience—by arguing that it refers to the Transfiguration. After all, the very next verse says: “Jesus took Peter, James, and John his brother, led them up on a high mountain by themselves; and He was transfigured before them. His face shone like the sun, and His clothes became as white as the light” (Matt. 17:1–2). This is describing the Transfiguration, which means the previous verses (Matt. 16:27–28) must be too.
Response: We can be certain Matthew 16:27–28 does not refer to the Transfiguration for many reasons. First, the Transfiguration happened just six days later (Matt. 17:1), so why would Jesus have to say some of his audience would still be alive? The timing Jesus gave in Matthew 16:27–28 suggests the event would not happen right away…yet it would not happen so many years later that everyone in his audience would be dead. The year AD 70 fits this timing perfectly. After all, Jesus uttered the statement in around AD 30.
Second, the coming described in Matthew 16:27–28 has angels, yet there were no angels at the Transfiguration (Matt. 17:1–13). These are different events.
Third, the Transfiguration was a vision, per Jesus (see Matt. 17:9). Yet the event/coming described in Matthew 16:27–28 was no mere vision. The faithful would be rewarded, and the wicked would be judged! In fact, Jesus had just talked about the judgment aspect in the previous verse: “For what profit is it to a man if he gains the whole world, and loses his own soul? Or what will a man give in exchange for his soul?” (v. 26). There was no judgment at the Transfiguration. The judgment didn’t happen until AD 70.
Fourth, another reason we can be certain that Matthew 16:27–28 does not refer to the Transfiguration is that Jesus did not “reward each man according to his works” at the Transfiguration (in AD 30). In fact, Jesus had still not done this thirty-five years later! We know this because the book of Revelation, which was written in AD 65, says this event was still future:
“And behold, I [Jesus] am coming quickly, and My reward is with Me, to give to everyone according to his work” (Rev. 22:12, italics mine).
This event had still not happened in AD 65, although it would “quickly.” The year AD 70 fits perfectly.
Fifth, still another reason we know Matthew 16:27–28 does not refer to the Transfiguration is that this passage is describing the same coming described in the Olivet Discourse, which is linked to the destruction of the temple—which happened in AD 70 (see above).
Sixth, another reason we know Matthew 16:27–28 is not about the Transfiguration is because it is describing the same event as Matthew 25:31–34, which everyone agrees is the Second Coming! (see above).
Alternative Interpretation #2: Matthew 16:27–28 refers to the Ascension
Another way some commentators try to get around the straightforward interpretation of Matthew 16:27–28—in which Jesus said he would come again before his audience passed away—is by arguing that it refers to Jesus’s Ascension, which happened forty days after his resurrection (in AD 33).
Response: This argument fails for many of the same reasons just stated above. First, why would Jesus say that some of his audience would still be alive if what he was talking about happened within a year or so? Only one apostle, Judas, had died before the Ascension. It makes much more sense to interpret Jesus’s words as meaning it would not happen right away, but it would not happen so many years later that his audience would all be dead. The year AD 70 fits perfectly.
Second, Jesus did not “reward each according to his works” at the Ascension. As pointed out above, the book of Revelation, which was written in AD 65, still looked forward to this event: “And behold, I [Jesus] am coming quickly, and My reward is with Me, to give to everyone according to his work” (Rev. 22:12, italics mine).
Third, Matthew 16:27–28 refers to the same coming as the Olivet Discourse, which is linked the destruction of the temple—which happened in AD 70 (see above).
Fourth, another reason we can be sure Matthew 16:27–28 is not about the Ascension is because it is describing the same event as Matthew 25:31–34, which everyone agrees is the Second Coming! (see above).
Alternative Interpretation #3: Matthew 16:27–28 refers to Pentecost
Another way commentators try to get around the straightforward reading of Matthew 16:27–28—in which Jesus said he would come before his audience passed away—is by arguing it refers to Pentecost, which happened about a week after the Ascension (in AD 33). As the argument goes, Matthew 16:27-28 and Mark 8:38-9:1 are parallel accounts; and Jesus said in Mark 8:38-9:1 that the kingdom would come with power—which is exactly what happened at Pentecost (Acts 1:8). Let’s compare these two passages:
Jesus: “For whoever is ashamed of Me [Jesus] and My words in this adulterous and sinful generation, of him the Son of Man also will be ashamed when He comes in the glory of His Father with the holy angels…Assuredly, I say to you, there are some standing here who will not taste death till they see the kingdom of God present with power” (Mark 8:38–9:1)
Pentecost: “You [disciples] shall receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you” (Acts 1:8)
Both passages mention “power” because they refer to the same event—Pentecost! And remember, Mark 8:38–9:1 is the parallel account of Matthew 16:27–28…which means Matthew 16:27–28 must be about Pentecost too.
Response: First, just because Mark 8:38–9:1 and Acts 1:8 both mention “power” [Greek: dunamis] does not mean they refer to the same event. “Power” (miracles) were present at many different events. For example, during Jesus’s earthly ministry, his countrymen wondered, “Where did this Man get this wisdom and these mighty works [dunamis]?” (Matt. 13:54). At another time, after a woman had touched Jesus and was healed of her twelve-year (blood) affliction, Jesus said “power [dunamis]” had gone out of him (Mark 5:30). Such “power” was present at many different events, so it does not necessarily have to refer to Pentecost in Mark 8:38–9:1—and it doesn’t, as the next points prove!
Second, Pentecost happened within a year or so of Jesus making the statement in Mark 8:38–9:1, so why would Jesus have to say some of his audience would still be alive when it happened? Only one apostle, Judas, died before Pentecost! It makes much more sense to interpret Jesus’s statement as saying the event would not happen right away, yet it would not be so many years away that his audience would all be dead. The year AD 70 fits perfectly.
Third, Mark 8:34–9:1 is the parallel account of Matthew 16:27–28, which is linked to the destruction of the temple (see above). And the temple was not destroyed at Pentecost!
Fourth, since Mark 8:34–9:1 is the parallel account of Matthew 16:27–28, therefore, whenever Mark 8:34–9:1 was fulfilled was when “each was rewarded according to his works” (Matt. 16:27). And this did not happen at Pentecost. In fact, it still had not happened thirty-five years later, although, by this time, it would quickly (see Rev. 22:12)!
Fifth, Mark 8:34–9:1 is the parallel account of Matthew 16:27–28, which refers to the Second Coming. Therefore, Mark 8:34–9:1 refers to the Second Coming.
The scriptural evidence shows that Matthew 16:27–28 describes the Second Coming in AD 70— not Pentecost, not the Ascension, and not the Transfiguration!
Alternative Interpretation #4: There is a 2000+ year Gap Between Matthew 16:27 and Matthew 16:28
Still another way some commentators try to get around the straightforward interpretation of Matthew 16:27–28—in which Jesus said he would come again within the lifetimes of his audience—is by putting a 2000-year gap (and counting) between the two verses. These commentators acknowledge verse 28 happened in AD 70, but they claim verse 27 refers to a still-future Second Coming.
Response: It is sheer desperation that causes people to say this. First, there is not a scintilla of biblical evidence for such a gap. Had Jesus had two comings in mind—separated by thousands of years—he surely would have said something to that effect somewhere in the context. For that matter, so would have Matthew, the writer who recorded Jesus’s words. Yet neither said anything about such a gap—because it doesn’t exist. Claiming there’s a gap is pure eisegesis.[1]
Second, the reason Jesus began verse 28 with “Assuredly, I say to you” was to emphasize the point he had just made in verse 27. In other words, Jesus was talking about the same event. Jesus often used the phrase “Assuredly, I say to you” to emphasize what had just been said. Consider the following examples:
“Let the little children come to Me, and do not forbid them; for of such is the kingdom of God. Assuredly, I say to you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God as a little child will by no means enter it” (Mark 10:14–15)
“For the Father judges no one, but has committed all judgment to the Son, that all should honor the Son just as they honor the Father. He who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent Him. Most assuredly, I say to you, he who hears My word and believes in Him who sent Me has everlasting life, and shall not come into judgment, but has passed from death into life” (John 5:22–24)
“‘Rabbi, look. The fig tree which You cursed has withered away.’ So Jesus answered and said to them, ‘Have faith in God. For assuredly, I say to you, whoever says to this mountain, “Be removed and be cast into the sea,” and does not doubt in his heart, but believes that those things he says will be done, he will have whatever he says’” (Mark 11:21–23)
During Jesus’ crucifixion, as he hung on the cross, one of the criminals said, “Lord, remember me when You come into Your kingdom.” And Jesus said to him, “Assuredly, I say to you, today you will be with Me in Paradise” (Luke 23:42–43)
“Do you not believe that I am in the Father, and the Father in Me?…Most assuredly, I say to you, he who believes in Me, the works that I do he will do also; and greater works than these he will do because I go to My Father” (John 14:10–12)
As these examples show, Jesus often used the phrase “Assuredly, I say to you” to emphasize what had just been said. And this is clearly what he was doing in Matthew 16:27–28 too. Both verses refer to the same coming, Jesus’s Second Coming, which happened before his audience passed away!
For a detailed discussion of the topics discussed in this article, get my book The End Is Here: How the New Testament’s Prophecies Were Fulfilled, available Fall 2024.
By Alex Polyak, Director of The Bible Fulfilled, 10/9/24
[1] Eisegesis means: To read one’s presuppositions and biases into a text (without textural justification). Exegesis, on the other hand, means: To allow the text to speak for itself.
