And his sisters, are they not all with us? Whence then hath this [man] all these things?
56. And his sisters, are they notall with us? Whence then hath this man all these things? Anexceedingly difficult question here arisesWhat 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 aformer marriage? or, Thirdly, Were they cousins, according toa common way of speaking among the Jews respecting persons ofcollateral descent? On this subject an immense deal has been written,nor are opinions yet by any means agreed. For the second opinionthere is no ground but a vague tradition, arising probably from thewish for some such explanation. The first opinion undoubtedly suitsthe text best in all the places where the parties are certainlyreferred to (Mt 12:46; and itsparallels, 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 toother objections, many of the best interpreters, thinking it in thelast degree improbable that our Lord, when hanging on the cross,would have committed His mother to John if He had had full brothersof His own then alive, prefer the third opinion; although, on theother hand, it is not to be doubted that our Lord might have goodreasons for entrusting the guardianship of His doubly widowed motherto the beloved disciple in preference even to full brothers of Hisown. Thus dubiously we prefer to leave this vexed question,encompassed as it is with difficulties. As to the names herementioned, the first of them, “JAMES,”is afterwards called “the Lord’s brother” (see on Ga1:19), but is perhaps not to be confounded with “James theson of Alphus,” one of the Twelve, though many think theiridentity beyond dispute. This question also is one of considerabledifficulty, and not without importance; since the James who occupiesso prominent a place in the Church of Jerusalem, in the latter partof the Acts, was apparently the apostle, but is by many regarded as”the Lord’s brother,” while others think their identitybest suits all the statements. The second of those here named,”JOSES” (orJoseph), must not be confounded with “Joseph called Barsabas,who was surnamed Justus” (Ac1:23); and the third here named, “SIMON,”is not to be confounded with Simon the Kananite or Zealot (see on Mt10:4). These three are nowhere else mentioned in the NewTestament. The fourth and last-named, “JUDAS,”can hardly be identical with the apostle of that namethough thebrothers of both were of the name of “James”nor (unlessthe two be identical, was this Judas) with the author of the catholicEpistle so called.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
And his sisters,…. Whose names, according to Epiphanius b, were Mary and Salome; whom he supposes were the daughters of Joseph, by a former wife; but rather of Alphaeus or Cleophas.
Are they not all with us? Lived in the same town with them, were well known by them, and familiar with them.
Whence then hath this man all these things? His wisdom and his mighty works; for since he had not them from any of their schools, and nurseries of learning, from their learned doctors and wise men; and could not have received them from his parents, and near relations, they could not devise from whence he should have them.
b Contr. Haeres. Tom. 2. 1. 3. Haeres. 78. &. lib. Ancorat.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
1) “And his sisters, are they not all with us?” (kai hai adelphai autou ouchi pasai pros humas eatin;) “And his sisters are they not all with or among us?” Mr 6:3. In addition to four sons, Mary had at least three daughters born to her and Joseph, after the virgin birth of Jesus. Had there only been two daughters, the language would have properly been are they not “both” with us.
2) “Whence then hath this man all these things?” (pothen oun touto tauta panta) “From where then does this man have all these kind of things?” knowledge, wisdom, and miracle working powers, Luk 4:22; Mat 21:23.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
“From where then has this man all these things?”
So if what was said about Him was true, from where had He obtained all these things that people were speaking about? It just could not be true. Note how in the next incident with Herod, Herod also learns of rumours about Jesus and comments erroneously on them (Mat 14:2). Thus there is a general misinterpretation of the evidence by all. Compare also the crowds and the Pharisees in Mat 9:33-34; Mat 12:23-24. There too there is a general air of misunderstanding, as we saw in Mat 13:10-15. The only ones who really know the truth (and even they still somewhat dimly) are His wider group of disciples. If the truth about Him is to be known it must come from God (Mat 13:16-17; Mat 11:27).
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Mat 13:56. Whence then, &c. This, like many other things which 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 have been the effect of some extraordinary and divine influence on his mind.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
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.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
with Greek. pros.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
Mat 13:56. , sisters) These they do not condescend even to name.
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
Reciprocal: Mar 6:3 – this Luk 4:22 – Is not Luk 8:20 – thy brethren Joh 2:12 – and his brethren Joh 6:42 – Is not Act 1:14 – with his
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
3:56
The Romanists insist that Mary always remained a virgin, and that when his “brethren” are mentioned it means his disciples since they are known by the name of brethren also. That is true, but when so used it includes all of the disciples regardless of sex. If that had been the meaning intended in verse 55 there would have been no reason to mention sisters in this verse for they would have been included in the other.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
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 Christs 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.