Citations: Matthew 21:33-46 || Mark 12:1-12 || Luke 20:9-19
The parable
A vineyard owner plants + equips + leases his vineyard to tenants and travels. At harvest he sends servants for the fruit; tenants beat / wound / kill the servants. He sends more servants; same fate. Finally he sends his son ("they will respect my son"); the tenants kill the son to seize the inheritance. Jesus: what will the owner do? Answer: destroy the tenants + give vineyard to others.
Direct OT background
Isaiah 5:1-7, the Song of the Vineyard. Israel = Yahweh's vineyard; he planted + cared for it; expected good fruit; got wild grapes. Jesus's parable extends Isaiah's vineyard imagery with sent-servants (prophets) + sent-son (himself) plot.
Jesus's interpretive payoff
Jesus quotes Psalms 118:22-23 immediately after: "The stone which the builders rejected has become the chief cornerstone." Then to the chief priests + Pharisees: "God's Kingdom will be taken away from you and will be given to a nation producing its fruit" (Matthew 21:43). They understand he is speaking against them; they want to arrest him but fear the crowd.
Theological framing
Salvation-history reading, the parable encodes Israel's history: prophets sent + rejected + killed (Matthew 23:37; Hebrews 11:36-38); Son sent + killed. The transfer to "a nation producing its fruit" is variously read, the early Church / the universal/Gentile-included Kingdom / both.
Replacement-theology controversy, does Matthew 21:43 mean the Church REPLACES Israel (supersessionism) or that the Kingdom INCLUDES Gentiles ALONGSIDE faithful Israel (the Pauline branch-grafting picture of Romans 11:17-24)? Different traditions weight differently. The spectrum is noted here without resolving it.