Matthew 13:56

Mat 13:56-57. Whence then hath this man all these things? — “This, like many other things that have since been objected against the gospel of Christ, is as much the language of stupidity as of infidelity; for the meanness of Christ’s education was a demonstration that his teaching in so excellent a manner must be the effect of some extraordinary and divine influence on his mind.” — Doddridge. And they were offended in him — Or scandalized at him, by reason of his mean original and humble circumstances in the world, and therefore would not believe that he was the Messiah. Jesus said, A prophet is not without honour, save in his own country — Or, as Dr. Doddridge renders the clause, A prophet is nowhere less esteemed than in his own country. “This is plainly the sense of the words, (though our translation is more literal,) for a prophet may, and often is affronted at a distance from home, as Christ himself found by frequent experience.” The expression is proverbial, signifying, “that those who possess extraordinary endowments are nowhere in less request than among their relations and acquaintance. The reason is, superior merit never fails to be envied, and envy commonly turns the knowledge it has of persons some way or other to their disadvantage.” — Macknight.

Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Mat 13:56. Ἀδελφαὶ, sisters) These they do not condescend even to name.

Bengel's Gnomon of the New Testament — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1860) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

And his sisters, are they not all with us? Whence then hath this man all these things? An exceedingly difficult question here arises--What were these "brethren" and "sisters" to Jesus? Were they, First, His full brothers and sisters? or, Secondly, Were they His step-brothers and step-sisters, children of Joseph by a former marriage? or, Thirdly, Were they cousins, according to a common way of speaking among the Jews respecting persons of collateral descent? On this subject an immense deal has been written, nor are opinions yet by any means agreed. For the second opinion there is no ground but a vague tradition, arising probably from the wish for some such explanation. The first opinion undoubtedly suits the text best in all the places where the parties are certainly referred to (Mat 12:46; and its parallels, Mar 3:31; Luk 8:19; our present passage, and its parallels, Mar 6:3; Joh 2:12; Joh 7:3, Joh 7:5, Joh 7:10; Act 1:14). But, in addition to other objections, many of the best interpreters, thinking it in the last degree improbable that our Lord, when hanging on the cross, would have committed His mother to John if He had had full brothers of His own then alive, prefer the third opinion; although, on the other hand, it is not to be doubted that our Lord might have good reasons for entrusting the guardianship of His doubly widowed mother to the beloved disciple in preference even to full brothers of His own. Thus dubiously we prefer to leave this vexed question, encompassed as it is with difficulties. As to the names here mentioned, the first of them, "JAMES," is afterwards called "the Lord's brother" (see on Gal 1:19), but is perhaps not to be confounded with "James the son of Alphæus," one of the Twelve, though many think their identity beyond dispute. This question also is one of considerable difficulty, and not without importance; since the James who occupies so prominent a place in the Church of Jerusalem, in the latter part of the Acts, was apparently the apostle, but is by many regarded as "the Lord's brother," while others think their identity best suits all the statements. The second of those here named, "JOSES" (or Joseph), must not be confounded with "Joseph called Barsabas, who was surnamed Justus" (Act 1:23); and the third here named, "SIMON," is not to be confounded with Simon the Kananite or Zealot (see on Mat 10:4). These three are nowhere else mentioned in the New Testament. The fourth and last-named, "JUDAS," can hardly be identical with the apostle of that name--though the brothers of both were of the name of "James"--nor (unless the two be identical, was this Judas) with the author of the catholic Epistle so called.

Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

56 And his sisters, are they not all with us? Whence then hath this man all these things?

Ver. 56. Whence then hath this man, &c.] Hath he not got his skill by ill arts? yea, by the black art doth he work these wonders? sure he never came by all these things honestly, and in God’s name. Think it not much to be miscensured.

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

And his sisters. Mentioned only here and in the parallel passage in Mark (cf. also "Western" authorities in Mar_3:32, where see Westcott and Heft, "Append."). Their names are quite unknown. Are they not all. There were several, at any rate not less than three, Matthew alone has all. With us? Mark expressly adds "here;" i.e. in Nazareth. Whence then hath this Man all these things? (ver. 54, note).

The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

(M) 56. And His sisters, are they not all with us? Whence, there fore, hath this man all these things?] Mk. has: “And are not His sisters here with us?”—πόθεν οὖν τούτῳ ταῦτα πάντα] the words are an expansion of the clause omitted from Mar_2. See note on v. 54.—πρὸς ἡμᾶς] for Mk.’s ὧδε πρὸς ἡμᾶς, see Introduction, p. xxiv. For εἶναι πρός, see Abbott, Johannine Grammar, 2363a. 2364.—πρός] implies the familiarity of daily intercourse.

International Critical Commentary — older volumes (1896–1929), various authors — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.