Newton's Cat

The Greek text in Mark & Matthew clearly says:

It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of God.

Apparently the Aramaic word for "camel", Gamla, also means "large rope".

NZSkep

true, and makes more sense. Camel seems utterly random.

What sort of retards translated the bible?
"hmmm this word Gamla could mean rope or camel. He's using it in the context of something being very difficult to pass through the eye of a needle. Which makes more sense? I'll go for camel."

Gamera

It's not random at all. The phrase is repeated with camels and other animals in rabbinical texts. This is well trodden ground.

John Kesler

See this post.

Gamera

"who can make an elephant pass through the eye of a needle."

Babylonian Talmud, Baba Mezi'a, 38b

"They do not show a man a palm tree of gold, nor an elephant going through the eye of a needle."

Babylonian Talmud, Berakoth, 55b

"13 There was a rich man named Onesiphorus who said: If I believe, shall I be able to do wonders? Andrew said: Yes, if you forsake your wife and all your possessions. He was angry and put his garment about Andrew's neck and began to beat him, saying: You are a wizard, why should I do so? 14 Peter saw it and told him to leave off. He said: I see you are wiser than he. What do you say? Peter said: I tell you this: it is easier for a camel to go through a needle's eye than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.

Apocryphal Acts of Peter and Andrew.

Newton's Cat

So - the original (in Mark) could have been written in Greek, and meant to be read as camel. Only people conversant with Aramaic would see the joke - or maybe it was a well-known play on the dual meaning of the Aramaic word? (One could then extend it to any large animal).

So the camel and the needle's eye is NOT proof that Mark & Matthew were originally written in Aramaic???

Gamera

I would suggest that it's evidence of nothing except that in Hellenize Judea, a couple related catchphrases existed, one that it's easier to get a rope through a needle, the other that it's easier to get a camel (or big animal) through a needle. The two may be related since the rope may have been originally made of camel hair, and the words are easy to confuse in the bi- or tri-lingual culture of the area. But the axioms parted company for whatever reason and tell us nothing about the original language of the gospels.

S.C.Carlson

Yes. At best, it is evidence of a Semitic stage somewhere in the transmission of the saying.

Stephen

Newton's Cat

Thanx - that's got that sorted. I was "led astray" by this:

'Mt. 19:24 = Mk. 10:25 = Lk. 18:25

...it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle
than for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of God.

The word for "camel" in the Aramaic manuscripts is GAMLA which can mean "camel" but can also refer to a "large rope," which is certainly the meaning here.'

from:

http://www.nazarene.net/hantri/sntp.htm

Wisdumb

The result is the same no matter what the correct translation actually is. The chances of either one of those two things entering the eye of a needle are slim to none.