The Eighteenth Sunday after Trinity is October 8, 2023.

Readings for Year A can be found here, read on the Seventeenth Sunday after Trinity on October 4, 2020.

The Gospel is as follows (emphases mine):

Matthew 21:33-46

21:33 “Listen to another parable. There was a landowner who planted a Vineyard, put a fence around it, dug a wine press in it, and built a watchtower. Then he leased it to tenants and went to another country.

21:34 When the harvest time had come, he sent his slaves to the tenants to collect his produce.

21:35 But the tenants seized his slaves and beat one, killed another, and stoned another.

21:36 Again he sent other slaves, more than the first; and they treated them in the same way.

21:37 Finally he sent his son to them, saying, ‘They will respect my son.’

21:38 But when the tenants saw the son, they said to themselves, ‘This is the heir; come, let us kill him and get his inheritance.’

21:39 So they seized him, threw him out of the vineyard, and killed him.

21:40 Now when the owner of the vineyard comes, what will he do to those tenants?”

21:41 They said to him, “He will put those wretches to a miserable death, and lease the vineyard to other tenants who will give him the produce at the harvest time.”

21:42 Jesus said to them, “Have you never read in the scriptures: ‘The stone that the builders rejected has become the cornerstone; this was the Lord’s doing, and it is amazing in our eyes’?

21:43 Therefore I tell you, the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people that produces the fruits of the kingdom.

21:44 The one who falls on this stone will be broken to pieces; and it will crush anyone on whom it falls.”

21:45 When the chief priests and the Pharisees heard his parables, they realized that he was speaking about them.

21:46 They wanted to arrest him, but they feared the crowds, because they regarded him as a prophet.

Commentary comes from Matthew Henry and John MacArthur.

Jesus delivered this parable immediately after the Parable of the Two Sons, which was last week’s reading (Matthew 21:23-32).

We are in the middle of Passion — Holy — Week, just days before the Crucifixion.

Jesus continued speaking to the chief priests and elders who questioned His authority (Matthew 21:23). He ended the Parable of the Two Sons with this observation about John the Baptist and the hierarchy’s rejection of him:

21:32 For John came to you in the way of righteousness and you did not believe him, but the tax collectors and the prostitutes believed him; and even after you saw it, you did not change your minds and believe him.

Jesus told them to hear another parable, that of a landowner who planted a vineyard, put a fence around it, dug a wine press in it and built a watchtower; he then leased it to tenants and went to another country (verse 33).

This was not an uncommon scenario in that era.

John MacArthur explains and calls our attention to Isaiah 5:

… the land of Israel is literally covered with such vineyards in the time of Christ; a major mainstay of their agrarian society was the cultivation of vineyards. And this serves as a very, very good illustration for our Lord to use in spiritual areas, as it did for Isaiah in chapter 5 when he used a very similar illustration to make a similar point about judgment. In fact, the parallels are intriguing enough that you should, at your own discretion and on your own time, compare Isaiah 5 with this parable.

Now, the vineyard is a very common thing in their life, and they would have understood exactly what was going on. First you have a certain householder. This is a man who owns the estate. This is the master, the owner. And he decides to take a portion of his land, perhaps a slope on a hillside, which was the common place for vineyards, and he plants a vineyard.

Then it tells us that he hedged it round about. Vineyards were vulnerable to wild animals, to robbers. And so, in order to protect vineyards, they were always hedged about. There could be a moat around them, on some occasions, water. There could be a wall built around them.

But on some occasions, there was a hedge – a thorny hedge – often even cactus was used. And to this day, you can see cactus in the land of Israel to keep out the animals and the robbers. The point being the man took care in planting the vineyard. He took care in protecting the vineyard.

Then he says he dug a winepress in it. That’s the place where the grapes could be turned into juice. And if you travel in the land of Israel today, you will see many remnants of old winepresses in archaeological digs and even in more contemporary settings. A winepress could be nothing more than a stone in the ground. The stone would be cut out as a shallow basin, very wide and shallow, filled with grapes. And then there were would be a trough running to a lower basin carved in another piece of stone. And as the grapes were crushed, the juice would flow down the trough into the lower basin and be collected there, from which it would be scooped and put into wineskins and pots and jars. That was the way that they turned their grapes into grape juice and wine.

Then it tells us that the man built a tower. A tower was for three purposes really: security, shelter, and storage. A tower would allow someone to watch and be sure no one was trying to invade. It would also be a place of shelter in the event of weather problems, and it would be a place for the storage of implements and tools and things necessary for the care of the vineyard.

Now, the point of all of that is to demonstrate to you that the man took great care in doing it right. He really did a good job putting his vineyard together. He was careful to supply the security that it needed.

And then it says he leased it out to tenant farmers and went into a far country. Literally went abroad or went away. Now, this is also common. A man may own land. He can’t cultivate it on his own, and so he leases it out. He works out an arrangement, a contract with the people who are leasing it, and they are to give him a certain portion of the crop each year, the remainder of which belongs to them for their own livelihood. They could have done well with this. It was a properly prepared vineyard; it was properly protected. Their crop could have flourished, given the factors of weather and their careful cultivation work. They could have done very well. The man had gone to all the extremes necessary, leased it out to these people, and went abroad, moved away.

Now, this would not be an uncommon setting. The hearers of our Lord would have completely understood this. It was very common to lease land for such cultivating purposes.

Matthew Henry tells us that the vineyard is the kingdom of God on earth, the Church:

I. We have here the privileges of the Jewish church, represented by the letting out of a vineyard to the husbandmen; they were as tenants holding by, from, and under, God the great Householder. Observe,

1. How God established a church for himself in the world. The kingdom of God upon earth is here compared to a vineyard, furnished with all things requisite to an advantageous management and improvement of it. (1.) He planted this vineyard. The church is the planting of the Lord, Isa 61 3. The forming of a church is a work by itself, like the planting of a vineyard, which requires a great deal of cost and care. It is the vineyard which his right hand has planted (Ps 80 15), planted with the choicest vine (Isa 5 2), a noble vine, Jer 2 21. The earth of itself produces thorns and briars; but vines must be planted. The being of a church is owing to God’s distinguishing favour, and his manifesting himself to some, and not to others. (2.) He hedged it round about. Note, God’s church in the world is taken under his special protection. It is a hedge round about, like that about Job on every side (Job 1 10), a wall of fire, Zech 2 5. Wherever God has a church, it is, and will always be, his peculiar care. The covenant of circumcision and the ceremonial law were a hedge or a wall of partition about the Jewish church, which is taken down by Christ; who yet has appointed a gospel order and discipline to be the hedge of his church. He will not have his vineyard to lie in common, that those who are without, may thrust in at pleasure; not to lie at large, that those who are within, may lash out at pleasure; but care is taken to set bounds about this holy mountain. (3.) He digged a wine-press and built a tower. The altar of burnt-offerings was the wine-press, to which all the offerings were brought. God instituted ordinances in his church, for the due oversight of it, and for the promoting of its fruitfulness. What could have been done more to make it every way convenient?

2. How he entrusted these visible church-privileges with the nation and people of the Jews, especially their chief priests and elders; he let it out to them as husbandmen, not because he had need of them as landlords have of their tenants, but because he would try them, and be honoured by them. When in Judah God was known, and his name was great, when they were taken to be to God for a people, and for a name, and for a praise (Jer 13 11), when he revealed his word unto Jacob (Ps 147 19), when the covenant of life and peace was made with Levi (Mal 2 4, 5), then this vineyard was let out. See an abstract of the lease, Cant 8 11, 12. The Lord of the vineyard was to have a thousand pieces of silver (compare Isa 7 13); the main profit was to be his, but the keepers were to have two hundred, a competent and comfortable encouragement. And then he went into a far country. When God had in a visible appearance settled the Jewish church at mount Sinai, he did in a manner withdraw; they had no more such open vision, but were left to the written word. Or, they imagined that he was gone into a far country, as Israel, when they made the calf, fancied that Moses was gone. They put far from them the evil day.

When the harvest time had come, the landowner sent his slaves — bondservants — to collect his produce (verse 34).

MacArthur says that was the normal procedure:

In other words, it was time to collect his portion. So, he sent his servants to them to receive from them what was due to him. They may have given it to him in currency, having sold what was produced. They may have given it to him in terms of grapes or in terms of wine, which could have been then transferred at the marketplace into cash. Whatever, he came to collect what was rightly his. That would also have been very common. The servants then came in his name, in his behalf, to receive what was due to him.

But the tenants seized the man’s slaves; they beat one, killed another and stoned yet another (verse 35).

MacArthur tells us how brutal this was:

Now, if you read Mark’s parallel account, you’ll find in Mark 12, verses 3 to 5, that he sort of singly identifies the sequence. First one came; they beat him. Next one came; they killed him. Next one came; they stoned him. Matthew just pulls them all into one verse and says, “They beat one, killed another, and stoned another.” This is amazing. I mean this good man, who had given them this piece of land to cultivate, by which they could have prospered, sends his servants merely to collect what is due to him by virtue of the arrangement and the fact that it is his land and his vineyard. And they beat one – and the word there means to scourge or flay or beat raw and bloody. And then it says they killed another. And in order to sort of distinguish that from stoning, which also brought death, we perhaps could say they killed instantly or immediately. It’s an aorist tense verb. It’s as if they murdered that person rather rapidly, perhaps with a knife or a spear or a sword. And then they stoned another. Lithoboleō basically means to stone to death. So, they flagellated one of them one of them bloody. They instantly murdered another and progressively crushed the life out of a third by dropping boulders on him. It’s incredible, these tenant farmers, given such privilege, given such opportunity, had become independent. They had become resentful. They had become filled with hatred for the owner. They had become overly possessive. They wanted everything. They didn’t want to give it to whom it was due.

The vineyard owner then sent other slaves, more than went the first time, but the tenants treated them with the same brutality (verse 36).

MacArthur explains our Lord’s point:

… the owner is so gracious. I mean I think after I had sent the first guy, I would have taken some pretty strong action. He sent one, he sent another, he sent another. Look at verse 36, “Again he sent other servants, more than the first group. And they did the same unto them. They killed them all. No matter who he sent, same reaction.

Now, this does indicate to us something of the generous, gracious, merciful patience of this landowner as he continues to send these servants, and they continue to kill them.

Some critics have said, at this point, “Well, this makes the parable a little farfetched. Nobody would keep sending servants.”

And the reply to that is, “That’s correct, and neither would they keep killing them, probably.” This is where the parable becomes utterly uncommon. And it is in the uncommonness of such a thing, the heinousness of such a thing, the unbelievability of it, the incredulity of it that our Lord is making His point.

In other words, He is saying, “If you think this is amazing, then what do you think about its application?” It is the extreme uncommonness of it. That is the point He wishes to make.

Henry goes further. The slaves are analogous to the prophets, up through John the Baptist:

Note, The calls and reproofs of the word, if they do not engage, will but exasperate. See here what hath all along been the lot of God’s faithful messengers, more or less; (1.) To suffer; so persecuted they the prophets, who were hated with a cruel hatred. They not only despised and reproached them, but treated them as the worst of malefactors—they beat them, and killed them, and stoned them. They beat Jeremiah, killed Isaiah, stoned Zechariah the son of Jehoiada in the temple. If they that live godly in Christ Jesus themselves shall suffer persecution, much more they that press others to it. This was God’s old quarrel with the Jews, misusing his prophets, 2 Chron 36 16. (2.) It has been their lot to suffer from their Master’s own tenants; they were the husbandmen that treated them thus, the chief priests and elders that sat in Moses’s chair, that professed religion and relation to God; these were the most bitter enemies of the Lord’s prophets, that cast them out, and killed them, and said, Let the Lord be glorified, Isa 66 5. See Jer 20 1, 2; 26 11.

Now see, [1.] How God persevered in his goodness to them. He sent other servants, more than the first; though the first sped not, but were abused. He had sent them John the Baptist, and him they had beheaded; and yet he sent them his disciples, to prepare his way. O the riches of the patience and forbearance of God, in keeping up in his church a despised, persecuted ministry! [2.] How they persisted in their wickedness. They did unto them likewise. One sin makes way for another of the same kind. They that are drunk with the blood of the saints, add drunkenness to thirst, and still cry, Give, give.

One might point out that Herod had John the Baptist beheaded, but, as Jesus pointed out in verse 32, the hierarchy did not believe in John’s call to repentance — even though the dregs of society did. The hierarchy had no use for him, which probably gave Herod the idea that his death would not be a loss.

Finally, the vineyard owner sent his son, saying ‘They will respect my son’ (verse 37).

MacArthur explains the Greek used in the original manuscript:

That phrase “last of all” or “finally” is full of emotion; it’s full of sadness. Here is a grieved man, and now he’s only got his son left. In fact, in Mark 12:6, the parallel passage, Mark says, “He is his only son.” His only son. He says, “I’ll send him.” No one left but him. They will reverence my son. That verb is a very interesting verb entrepō. It basically means to turn one’s self around, being ashamed of hurting or injuring. It’s a very rich word.

And he says, “Certainly they will turn around from that behavior because of the shame of it. I mean they won’t do it, surely, to my son. They will stand in awe of my son. They will have respect and regard for my son, surely.”

Henry has more on the verse, which points to Christ:

Never did grace appear more gracious than in sending the Son. This was done last of all. Note, All the prophets were harbingers and forerunners to Christ. He was sent last; for if nothing else would work upon them, surely this would; it was therefore served for the ratio ultima—the last expedient. Surely they will reverence my Son, and therefore I will send him. Note, It might reasonably be expected that the Son of God, when he came to his own, should be reverenced; and reverence to Christ would be a powerful and effectual principle of fruitfulness and obedience, to the glory of God; if they will but reverence the Son, the point is gained. Surely they will reverence my Son, for he comes with more authority than the servants could; judgment is committed to him, that all men should honour him. There is greater danger in refusing him than in despising Moses’s law.

But when the tenants saw the son, they said, ‘This is the heir; come, let us kill him and get his inheritance’ (verse 38).

Henry tells us:

How it was plotted (v. 38); When they saw the Son: when he came, whom the people owned and followed as the Messiah, who would either have the rent paid, or distrain for it; this touched their copyhold, and they were resolved to make one bold push for it, and to preserve their wealth and grandeur by taking him out of the way, who was the only hindrance to it, and rival with them. This is the heir, come, let us kill him. Pilate and Herod, the princes of this world, knew not; for if they had known, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory, 1 Cor 2 8. But the chief priests and elders knew that this was the heir, at least some of them; and therefore Come, let us kill him. Many are killed for what they have. The chief thing they envied him, and for which they hated and feared him, was his interest in the people, and their hosannas, which, if he was taken off, they hope to engross securely to themselves. They pretended that he must die, to save the people from the Romans (John 11 50); but really he must die, to save their hypocrisy and tyranny from that reformation which the expected kingdom of the Messiah would certainly bring along with it. He drives the buyers and sellers out of the temple; and therefore let us kill him; and then, as if the premises must of course go to the occupant, let us seize on his inheritance. They thought, if they could but get rid of this Jesus, they should carry all before them in the church without control, might impose what traditions, and force the people to what submissions, they pleased. Thus they take counsel against the Lord and his Anointed; but he that sits in heaven, laughs to see them outshot in their own bow; for, while they thought to kill him, and so to seize on his inheritance, he went by his cross to his crown, and they were broken pieces with a rod of iron, and their inheritance seized. Ps 2 2, 3, 6, 9.

Recall these verses from Matthew 21 about what happened the day before:

¹² Jesus entered the temple courts and drove out all who were buying and selling there. He overturned the tables of the money-changers and the benches of those selling doves. ¹³ ‘It is written,’ he said to them, ‘“My house will be called a house of prayer,”^[e] but you are making it “a den of robbers.”^[f]’

¹⁴ The blind and the lame came to him at the temple, and he healed them. ¹⁵ But when the chief priests and the teachers of the law saw the wonderful things he did and the children shouting in the temple courts, ‘Hosanna to the Son of David,’ they were indignant.

¹⁶ ‘Do you hear what these children are saying?’ they asked him.

‘Yes,’ replied Jesus, ‘have you never read,

¹⁷ And he left them and went out of the city to Bethany, where he spent the night.

Jesus said that the tenants seized the landowner’s son, threw him out of the vineyard and killed him (verse 39).

MacArthur puts us in the position of our Lord’s audience upon hearing the parable:

It’s amazing. Now they killed the man’s son. They knew who he was, no mystery. They knew exactly who he was. They planned his murder. It was premeditated; first degree; the result of careful, wicked planning, with full knowledge of who he was. They premeditated his murder so they could control everything. It’s unbelievable. That’s the illustration.

Now, you can imagine that the people are piqued in terms of interest. They know it’s a parable. They know he has a spiritual point in mind, but the story itself is so captivating, that even without the parabolic aspect or without the interpretation, we are captivated by the evil of these men and by the sadness of the father who has lost all his servants and his son.

Henry gets right to the spiritual and historical reality:

Though the Roman power condemned him, yet it is still charged upon the chief priests and elders; for they were not only the prosecutors, but the principal agents, and had the greater sin. Ye have taken, Acts 2 23. Nay looking upon him to be as unworthy to live, as they were unwilling he should, they cast him out of the vineyard, out of the holy church, which they supposed themselves to have the key of, and out of the holy city for he was crucified without the gate, Heb 13 12. As if He had been the shame and reproach, who was the greatest glory of his people Israel. Thus they who persecuted the servants, persecuted the Son; as men treat God’s ministers, they would treat Christ himself, if he were with them.

Having finished the parable, Jesus then asked what the landowner would do to the wicked tenants (verse 40).

Of our Lord’s question, MacArthur points out:

… in a very traditional, rabbinical way, He leads them down the path and makes them conclude the story themselves.

The wretched hierarchy did come up with the correct answer but could not apply it to themselves because of spiritual blindness.

They said that the owner would would ‘put those wretches to a miserable death, and lease the vineyard to other tenants who will give him the produce at the harvest time’ (verse 41).

Henry explains the hypocrisy:

Note, Many can easily prognosticate the dismal consequences of other people’s sins, that see not what will be the end of their own.

MacArthur has more:

They loved to hear themselves saying such moral things. They love to feel so irate at injustice and evil. This feeds their hypocrisy. “They say” – I take it the “they” is the religious leaders. Luke tells us that the people gathered around. Some of them cried, “God forbid. No, no, no, no.”

In other words, those people, when they heard, “What will he do to them,” and the leaders, “Why, he will miserably destroy those wicked farmers and give the vineyard to someone who will give them – give him the fruits of it.” Cried out, “No, no, no, no,” as if they were unable to imagine what he would do to them.

MacArthur adds, referring to Luke’s account:

And they transferred their sorrow for those who would be so devastatingly punished. They were so caught up in the story, perhaps, that they were just unable to imagine what he would do to such wicked people. And the sympathy of their heart cried out even in behalf of the wicked. Or it may be that some of the people began already to see the true interpretation of the parable, and they sensed a spiritual reality that created great fear in their hearts. Luke doesn’t tell us which. It could have been both to be honest.

As to the hierarchy’s reply, MacArthur says:

Now, two things are said in verse 41, right out of the mouths of these leaders, and they condemn themselves. “He will miserably destroy those wicked men,” that’s number one; “and will lease his vineyard unto other farmers who shall render him the fruits in their seasons.” Miserably destroy the wicked men, leave his vineyard to other farmers who render him the fruits in their seasons.

There are two things there. First is judgment. Second is replacement. Mark that. First is judgment, the replacement. So, they have said it with their own mouths they have concluded the illustration.

Henry reminds us of the events which followed illustrating judgment and replacement and says this continues to be true today:

(1.) That he will miserably destroy those wicked men; it is destruction that is their doom. Kakous kakos apolesei—Malos male perdet. Let men never expect to do ill, and fare well. This was fulfilled upon the Jews, in that miserable destruction which was brought upon them by the Romans, and was completed about forty years after this; and unparalleled ruin, attended with all the most dismal aggravating circumstances. It will be fulfilled upon all that tread in the steps of their wickedness; hell is everlasting destruction, and it will be the most miserable destruction to them of all others, that have enjoyed the greatest share of church privileges, and have not improved them. The hottest place in hell will be the portion of hypocrites and persecutors.

(2.) That he will let out his vineyard to other husbandmen. Note, God will have a church in the world, notwithstanding the unworthiness and opposition of many that abuse the privileges of it. The unbelief and frowardness of man shall not make the word of God of no effect. If one will not, another will. The Jews’ leavings were the Gentiles’ feast. Persecutors may destroy the ministers, but cannot destroy the church. The Jews imagined that no doubt they were the people, and wisdom and holiness must die with them; and if they were cut off, what would God do for a church in the world? But when God makes use of any to bear up his name, it is not because he needs them, nor is he at all beholden to them. If we were made a desolation and an astonishment, God could build a flourishing church upon our ruins; for he is never at a loss what to do for his great name, whatever becomes of us, and of our place and nation.

Jesus then said to them (verse 42), ‘Have you never read in the scriptures: “The stone that the builders rejected has become the cornerstone; this was the Lord’s doing, and it is amazing in our eyes”?’

Jesus was citing Psalm 118:22-23:

²² The stone the builders rejected
    has become the cornerstone;
²³ the Lord has done this,
    and it is marvellous in our eyes.

MacArthur tells us of its significance here:

… it’s sheer divine genius … The same Psalm from which the hosannas had come that had been offered to Christ two days before and even the day before by the children in the temple, the boys.

Psalm 118 was familiar to them, and they knew that verse that said, “The stone which the builders rejected, the same has become the head of the corner. This is the Lord’s doing, and it is marvelous in our eyes.” And it is that prophecy that the Lord uses to explain the parable.

He begins by saying to them – and it’s very sarcastic – “Did you never read in the Scriptures? You who pride yourself on spending dawn till dusk reading the Scripture, you who say you know the Scriptures, you who excel in the law, did you miss this one?” It’s an indictment. “Did you miss the one that said there was a stone rejected that became the head of the corner, and that the Lord would do that, and it would be marvelous when He did it? Did you miss that?”

Now, the heart of what Psalm 118:22 and 23 is saying is very simple. When builders want to build a building, they need a cornerstone. And a cornerstone is the most important stone in the building. It’s key in the foundation. It’s key, of course, in the support of the roof. But more than that, it sets the angles for the walls; it draws the lines by which the uniformity of the building maintains itself. And if the cornerstone is off, then down the way somewhere the whole building is off.

And so, a cornerstone was the most carefully selected of all stones, that the building might be set as to its walls and its form in perfect order. And cornerstones were massive stones. In our recent trip to Israel [1983], we saw some of the cornerstones in the Herodian wall that rises to surround the temple mount in Jerusalem. There’s one of those stones on the corner that’s 32 feet by 3 feet by 2 feet – one stone quarried by hand. We saw another stone that’s just one of the foundation stones down at the base of the Herodian wall that’s 12 meters long and weighs tons. How they quarried it and how they move it is still unknown. But a cornerstone of a great edifice was a key stone. And so, in selecting one, they wanted to be sure it was perfect. And he says – does the psalmist – that there was a stone which the builders rejected. That can’t do it; it’s not adequate; it’s not the right stone; it’s not perfect; we reject it. And they threw it away. But it became, later, the head of the corner. Who did it? It is the Lord’s doing, and it is a wonder in our eyes. In other words, God brings back a stone that men reject and puts it in the place of the most significance.

MacArthur explains that the cornerstone in Psalm 118 refers to Israel but also to Christ:

Follow carefully. It’s Israel in the psalm. Israel was a stone which the empire builders of the world rejected. This is the historic sense of the psalm. The empire builders of the world ignored Israel. They saw Israel as insignificant and unimportant. And they discarded Israel. They have no place for Israel in the building of their great empires.

But not so the Lord. For the stone Israel, which indeed is the cornerstone of the redemptive history of the world, which the world has despised and rejected, God sets back in the place of significance in the building of his redemptive plan, doesn’t He? I mean the world may reject Israel and their place in history, but God knows they signify the key place in His redemptive plan.

So, God miraculously keeps picking Israel up off the discarded stone pile and sticking it back into His plan as the key cornerstone. That’s historic and a very important point to note. This small nation, which continues to exist, is the cornerstone in the divine plan of God for redemptive history. But there was something even more than that in that verse. Much of the psalms give us messianic perspectives. And in those messianic perspectives, there’s a double fulfillment. And there’s something in that psalm that is intended to go far beyond the nation Israel and to talk about one who comes out of the loins of that nation Israel.

Let me show you. Acts chapter 4, verse 10. Peter is preaching in the city of Jerusalem, addressing the leaders of Israel, the Sanhedrin, the same group, really, that Jesus is talking to in Matthew 21, “Be it known unto you all” – verse 10 – “and to all the people of Israel that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, whom God raised from the dead, even, even by Him doth this man stand here before you well.” That is he lame man that was healed …

Then verse 11, “This is the stone which was set at naught of you builders, which is become the head of the corner. Neither is there salvation in any other, for there is no other name under heaven given among men whereby we must be saved.” Who is the stone then of Psalm 118? Who is it? “Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you crucified.” The stone which the builders – what? – rejected, whom God raised from the dead, has now become the head of the corner. The rejected stone is the crucified Christ; the restored cornerstone is the resurrected Christ. It couldn’t be more clearly said than that. Peter reiterates the same message is his first epistle, chapter 2, “Behold I lay in Zion” – verse 6 – “a chief cornerstone, elect, precious. He that believeth on Him shall not be confounded. Unto you, therefore, who believe He is precious. Unto them who are disobedient, the stone which the builders disallowed, the same is become the head of the corner, and a stone of stumbling, and a rock of offence.” Peter says the same thing. Christ is the cornerstone. Christ is the cornerstone.

Paul says it in Ephesians chapter 2. Says, “We are fellow citizens” – verse 19 – “with the saints, in the household of God, and are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Himself being the chief cornerstone.”

Jesus said that the kingdom of God would be taken away from His chosen people and given to a people producing fruits of the kingdom (verse 43).

MacArthur rewords the verse for us:

“God, the householder, planted a vineyard, a place of blessing, a place of salvation, a place of promise, a place of covenant. And you got in that place of blessing, and you hoarded that, and you misused that, and you misappropriated that, and you robbed from God what was due Him. And you never gave Him the glory to His name, and you never demonstrated the fruit of repentance, and you never showed the fruit of righteousness, and you gave God nothing. And when God sent His prophets to you, one after another of those prophets you killed.”

MacArthur continues:

Now, let me just give you a footnote here that’s amazing. I believe this is one of the most missed and yet most clear claims to deity that our Lord ever gave. He says here, “God sent you prophets, and then God sent a Son.” And Mark 12:6, “An only Son.” And so, Christ distinguishes Himself as the Son of God, sent from God, as different than the prophets. He’s not a servant like they’re servants; He’s a Son. It is a claim to deity.

And in the parable, this is the heir. To him belongs the inheritance is the implication. This is the son. It is a remarkable claim by Jesus to be the Son of God. A claim for which they wanted Him dead. There’s no way around it. He claimed to be the only Son of God, not a prophet like other prophets, not even the best of the prophets. Nothing less will do than that He is the incarnate Son of God. He is either that or He is a false prophet and a liar …

In fact, when He rose from the dead, do you remember that they bribed the soldiers to lie about His resurrection? That’s right. They knew the truth. They were unwilling to accept it like people today. There’s no lack of evidence. There’s no lack of credibility regarding Christ. They wanted Him dead because they were afraid to lose their position and their power, their control.

Do you realize that Jesus is here, telling them to their face that He knows they’ll kill Him? That’s right. There’s no surprise to Him. He is not a victim. He said, “I am not having My life taken from Me” – in John’s Gospel – “I lay it down of Myself.”

Would you notice – verse 39 – that in the parable they took the son out of the vineyard. And that’s consistent, too, because Christ was crucified, it says in Hebrews 13:12 and 13, outside the gate. Right? Outside the gate …

So, the illustration, the conclusion, and the explanation. And that explanation is keyed by an understanding of the text of verse 42 from Psalm 118. Now the application, very simple. The application — whatever veil may have remained over this dark minds is going to get taken off now. Verse 43, “Therefore” – now I’m going to apply it – “say I unto you, the kingdom of God shall be taken from you.”

You said it in verse 41, “He will lease his vineyard unto other farmers.” And you said it right …

Jesus says to the leaders of Israel, “You have lost the right to be in the place of blessing.” God turned from Israel. That was the end of a great day. Oh, my. That was the end of a great era. God turned away from Israel as the people of blessing and says, “I will give it to a nation.” What nation? Well, the word means people. What people? Well, the same nation of which Peter speaks in 1 Peter 2, “An holy nation.” I believe it’s the Church, the redeemed of this age.

So, those two results. A kingdom of God shall be taken from you, given to someone else. That’s the first one. Taken away. That’s sad. That’s replacement that we talked about earlier. You forfeited it. And Israel today is unblessed. We’ve been learning about that in Romans 9, 10, and 11, and I’m not going to, and I’m not going to go into developing it all, but Israel has been removed for the time being from the place of blessing.

You say, “Will they ever come back?”

Yes, they will. Yes, they will. God will graft them in, it says in Romans. All Israel will be saved. The gifts and calling of God are without repentance. “The day will come” – says Zechariah – “when they’ll look on Him whom they have pierced and mourn for Him as an only son.” Salvation will come to Israel. Some from every tribe will become evangelists to proclaim the Gospel around the world. Their day will come again, because God has a promise He must fulfill. But for now, they are set aside, and Romans 9 says, “A people which were not My people are now My people. I have called a no-people to become My people, a non-beloved to be My beloved, “Romans 9:25 and 26 says. A new people. A new nation. A holy nation. Not ethnically defined, but defined by faith in Christ.

We are that nation. Bless God. We bring forth the fruit of repentance, the fruit of righteousness by believing in the Lord Jesus Christ. We are the new channel through which God can bring the Gospel of salvation to a world that needs it so much.

Jesus returned to the analogy of the cornerstone, saying that the one who falls on it will be broken to pieces and that it will crush anyone on whom it falls (verse 44).

Henry explains the verse, using many Old Testament references:

This Stone, which the builders refused, is set for the fall of many in Israel; and we have here the doom of two sorts of people, for whose fall it proves that Christ is set.

[1.] Some, through ignorance, stumble at Christ in his estate of humiliation; when this Stone lies on the earth, where the builders threw it, they, through their blindness and carelessness, fall on it, fall over it, and they shall be broken. The offence they take at Christ, will not hurt him, any more than he that stumbles, hurts the stone he stumbles at; but it will hurt themselves; they will fall, and be broken, and snared, Isa 8 14; 1 Pet 2 7, 8. The unbelief of sinners will be their ruin.

[2.] Others, through malice, oppose Christ, and bid defiance to him in his estate of exaltation, when this Stone is advanced to the head of the corner; and on them it shall fall, for they pull it on their own heads, as the Jews did by that challenge, His blood be upon us and upon our children, and it will grind them to powder. The former seems to bespeak the sin and ruin of all unbelievers; this is the greater sin, and sorer ruin, of persecutors, that kick against the pricks, and persist in it. Christ’s kingdom will be a burthensome stone to all those that attempt to overthrow it, or heave it out of its place; see Zech 12 3. This Stone cut out of the mountain without hands, will break in pieces all opposing power, Dan 2 34, 35. Some make this an allusion to the manner of stoning to death among the Jews. The malefactors were first thrown down violently from a high scaffold upon a great stone, which would much bruise them; but then they threw anothe