Velo Princesse

My understanding was that in Jesus' day there was a gate in Jerusalem called 'Needles Eye', which was so small that a camel could only get through it if all of the baggage and what not was removed. So- the statement that it is easier for a camel to get through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of Heaven means that you have to be willing to let go of all your stuff and worldly possessions to make it to Heaven.

I thought that was really profound... especially when cleared up by a pastor who lived in a huge house with a grand piano in his living room. :huh:

S.C.Carlson

A lot of pastors (and others) like to repeat this story, but there is actually no historical evidence of any value for it.

Wisdumb

Whenever I hear the camel story I can't help but to think about that Saturday Night Live skit in which they find a few funny ways of getting around this verse. I think one of em was liquefying the camel and passing it through the eye via a tube. I could be wrong. Its been years since I last saw it.

ionerice

I was taught that the eye of a needle was the gate at the entrance to the ancient cities and it was too low for a camel to walk through because of its humps. In order for a camel to enter into the city it had to be laid on its side and be drug through the gates. Perhaps we can find a picture of a needle/gate in a biblical encyclopedia. The picture I saw was around 6 feet high.

Boro Nut

Bloody hell. I'm surprised you managed to turn the pages. I don't suppose it was from Texas was it?

Boro Nut

Toto

this site contains the story and some pictures - meant for a Sunday school lesson, apparently.

Gamera

You were indeed led astray by what amounts to a typical linguistic interplay in bi-lingual cultures, where related words and phrases move back and forth in semantic range, and where unrelated words get folk etymologized.

Hence, for instance, Middle English "to boot" (to add or kick in) is a folk etymology of the Old Danish "to bote" (as a benefit). The phrases have a similar semantic range, but a totally different etymology. This was the result of the Danelaw and the bi-lingualism of north east England, where Danish words and phrases intermingled with related and unrelated Old English vocabulary.

The appearance of "to boot" therefore in a Middle English text doesn't mean (as you tried to argue about Aramaic GAMLA) that the text was originally written in Danish and translated into ME. It simply means the two languages have a history that intersected and produced this peculiar phrase, which happens all the time.

Malachi151

I think that we need to make this point clear, which is that the motivation behind this argument is an attempt to prove Aramaic premacy for Matthew at least (if not also the others), leading to the claim then that Matthew was written first, which then goes to support the traditional view of the writing of the Biblical texts.

This is one of those little pieces of so-called academia that has an extremely strong bias and motivation behind it, which most people are highly unaware of.

S.C.Carlson

In my experience, the ulterior motive is usually to push the primacy of the Peshitta translation of the NT.

Steven Avery

Hi Folks,

Mark 10:25
It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle,
than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.

Luke 18:25
For it is easier for a camel to go through a needle's eye,
than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.

Good thread on the camel and the eye of the needle.
I have had a couple of related questions I have wanted to get around to asking.

First, in addition to the rabbinical/Talmudic examples,
this verse also has a similar type of cultural hyperbole, worth noting.

Matthew 23:24
Ye blind guides, which strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel.

Now, I have wondered what is the Aramaic Peshitta word there.
If it is gamla, that starts de-Occamizing the Aramaic-first usage
of this verse for their arguments.

Also note Murdock

Mark 10:25
It is easier for a camel to enter the eye of a needle,
than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.

Murdock and Etheridge both translated the two verses as camel, Lamsa was the one who first used the rope translation in English and Lamsa was known for ideas that ranged from goofy to eclectic to interesting and respectable to junque.

And there is another related question, what was the usage in ancient Aramaic of gamla? When I checked a smidgen I could not find verification that it was used for rope in ancient times. Perhaps on one of the Aramaic forums more information could be garnered. Starting with the usage in the Peshitta Tanach. Or some help here ?

Oh, one other point puts a severe crimp in Aramaic-primacy theories. (It is really not a consistent well-thought-out concept.) Even on their favorite issue of split words. In reading their theories, I have seen that the proponents of the theory have about three separate Aramaic-->Greek translations leading to the Greek textlines (yep, sure...).

And with that theory you have all sorts of great difficulties that apply here and dozens of other places. Essentially, why would all three translators have made the same 'error' ? Again and again and again. Another easy example to see is the supposed interpolations of internal translations (eg."Messias, which is, being interpreted, the Christ."). Not sensible for any one Aramaic-->Greek translation, and multiple translations makes it that much absurd.

======

Oh, Newton's Cat, please be careful use that Nazarene site (James Trimm) as a scholarly source. I even had to write a long article about the fakery of credentials, lack of scholarship background, and the tawdry plagiarism of copying from another source and calling it his own original NT translation. As a money-making enterprise.

Hi John,
As pointed out above it is unclear so far that anything occurred at all, that the Aramaic word was not simply the translation of camel. The spoken words could easily have been Aramaic gamla, meaning camel, in the regular Greek-originals theory or in any Aramaic theory. Or there could have been another word spoken for camel, in Aramaic, Hebrew or Greek. The only theory that does not really make any sense is an Aramaic (dual usage word?) written text of gamla as camel and then multiple translations to Greek all independently changing the meaning.

However I would find reading the Metzger reference interesting, can you source it or type it or give a bit fuller summary? Thanks.

Shalom,
Steven Avery
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Messianic_Apologetic