how can that be right, if they did not answer at all though?
ah, just found the Matt account,
45“If David calls Him ‘Lord,’ how then can the Messiah be his Son? ”
46No one was able to answer Him at all,
and imo one should read the Mark and Luke ones for a better grasp here, bc the scribes were not castigated at all for "not being able to answer," see, even here in Matthew, which is the only acct in which the scribes were not just
commended by Christ in the previous passage, #1, and also the only account in which Christ is characterized as asking the question unrhetorically; in the other two no answer is even being anticipated, right. and even in Matthew no one is condemned or dismissed for not answering, either
and not only that, but the scribes' attitude in the
Mark and
Luke accounts make plain that they understood why David called Him Lord, so "
No one was able to answer Him at all" in Matthew (only) is a very curious statement to make, the more you look at it. Note also the place that "
And they no longer dared to ask Him anything" (et al) changes, too, from before the account to after it, depending upon which account.
it is @
33So they answered Jesus, "We don't know." And Jesus said to them, "Neither will I tell you by what authority I do these things" that what you are trying to infer is being done, iow, at least i think