With this kind of recognition came power, and with power comes pride; finally, with pride corruption is soon and sure to follow. And since all men are human, with the proclivity to temptation and evil, these men were no exception. Was not this clearly known by them in their wisdom literature, of which Proverbs is but one example? As within the evolution of all groups, some may be seen of exceptional character who held to the higher moral principles of their tenets ( Mat.8:19; Mk.12:34), however, as a whole, these had become so corrupt they were condemned by Christ Himself when He appeared upon the scene ( Mat.12:34; 23:13-39; Mk.12:38-40; Lk.11:44; 20:46-47). It was not so much their knowledge and teachings He condemned ( Mat.23:3a), though He certainly strongly objected to the added burden it placed upon the people, rather, it was their failure to observe themselves what they taught others ( Mat.23:3b-7). Hence, He called them hypocrites, and specifically warned His disciples of such hypocrisy (cf., Mt.16:6; Mk.8:15; Luke 12:1).

Therefore, we have in our New Testament record a not so flattering portrait of this evolved latter day scribe. Since these are words spoken by our Lord, it is fitting that we give at least a brief look at their description. First in Mat. 23; Mk.12:38; Lk.20:46-47 we see: (1) They sat in the seat of Moses (they ruled over the people in the Mosaic law); (2) They placed added burdens upon the people; (3) They failed to observe their own teachings; (4) They were pedantic in both their public appearance and personal teachings; (5) They sought selfishly for themselves first; (6) They loved being seen in public; (7) They were heady in seeking honor from men, placing great emphasis upon earned titles (sound familiar today?); (8) They created and were obstacles to the people for seeing and entering the kingdom (through their hypocrisy - cf., Lk.12:1 & 17:1-2); (9) They were corrupt in their duties and dealings with the less fortunate; (10) They were sanctimonious in their public worship; (11) They were evil influences upon their proselytes; (12) They were false teachers; (13) They were spiritually blind, thus fools for the false; (14) They were devoid of Pure Religion; (15) They were inwardly unclean; (16) They were outwardly "whited sepulchers"; (17) They were self-righteous in condemnation of others; and finally, (18) They were in imminent danger of everlasting judgment!

Scripture further reveals that: (1) they were members of the Sanhedrin ( Mt.16:21; 26:3); (2) there was a marked contrast to Jesus and their style of teaching ( Mk.1:22); (3) they found fault with Jesus' teachings ( Mt.21:15); (4) murmured against His work ( Mt.9:3; Lk.5:30; 15:2); and (5), attempted to test and trick Jesus in the law to discredit and condemn Him ( Jn.8:13); (6) they were participants in Peter and John's imprisonment ( Acts 4:5), and in Stephen's death ( Acts 6:12); (7) they are last seen in Acts siding with Paul and the Pharisees against the Sadducees on the doctrines of the resurrection, angels, and spirits Acts 23:9).

And finally, (8) they were co-conspirators in Christ's death ( Lk.14:1; 22:6; 23:10). If it were possible to bring forward all their ancient predecessors, from Moses, who originally wrote the law, to Ezra, who gave birth to their current position, to stand beside these current men of titles, even these Scribes would have to admit, if not publicly, certainly inwardly, the stark contrast between them. By their standards, indeed, Ezra himself would be viewed as a threat to their deeply entrenched power that had evolved from their once worthy function. Would they crucify him as well?