Mark 12:28 – 44 Controversy with the Scribes

Are these three scribe stories brought together here to illustrate three dimensions of these community officials, record keepers, bureaucrats, middle-level government officials? One story praises them, one confuses them and one condemns them. Together they represent Mark’s understanding of them? Maybe

As to theology, not far from the kingdom. A standard question put to a teacher to clarify the most important of the commandments. It’s the “thirty second elevator pitch”. Jesus’ response leads in turn to the scribe’s resume and agreement: “Teacher, you have truly said that …” On theology, Jesus gives him a passing grade.

As to interpreting scripture, confused. In Ps 110:1, God (Lord) invites the king (my Lord) to ascend the throne. It is assumed that later Jewish tradition sees this psalm to be narrated by David in praise of the Messiah and therefore rules out the Messiah being the Son of David – David cannot call his son ‘Lord’. Let’s move on!

As to behavior, not a good word to be said. I agree with the suggestion that the story of the Widow’s mites is a lament. The introduction to the story (12:38-40) characterizes the scribes as “devouring widows’ houses” and the conclusion (13:1-2) points out the irony of making any donation to the Temple. The widow is not held up to us as an example of the correct spirit of giving (she may be no less hypocritical that the rich people) nor does it form a basis for believing that “every little bit counts”. Jesus observes a particular widow whose “house has been devoured.” She has been encouraged to bleed herself dry and we see her last two coins dropping into the box – and it is all so pointless! The woman should be the object of our pity and support.