Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The camel, the rope, and the needle's eye

kiwihellenist.blogspot.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 298 posts

Re: The camel, the rope, and the needle's eye

#201

Post by DontchaKnowit »

KMag wrote: post #183
marcus_holmes wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's how I read it. That he was just looking around exasperated trying to explain why rich people don't go to heaven, and saw a camel and made it up on the spot as an example of something that is obviously impossible. I still find it fascinating that this simple, utterly unambiguous line, gets totally ignored or misinterpreted so that rich people get to call themselves christian while persecuting gay folks on the b…

The OT references aren't vague, but due to the idea of the new covenant, they likely apply as much as the OT prohibitions against touching pig leather or touching a menstruating woman. The only treatment of homosexuality in the NT comes from Paul, and the Greek word he uses for the receiving partner is specifically the word for an underage male slave kept for sexual purposes, so it's unclear how applicable it is to m…

agreed - although My understanding is that the word Paul uses there is actually not even a real word, and appears nowhere else in literature at the time - so we really have no clue what he means.

I always find it interesting that there is at least this one verse where there is some contention as to whether it is an explicit ban on male homosexual relationships - But there is absolutely no argument whatsoever : there is no reference at all to female homosexual relationships in the bible. Ever. And yet the church is often very preoccupied with viewing lesbian relationships as a sin. Very strange

Re: The camel, the rope, and the needle's eye

#202

Post by Adverblessly »

KMag wrote: post #176
emodendroket wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have to admit that the fact that various commentators suggest THREE different languages happen to have words for camel and rope that sound almost the same does rather bolster the case being made here. Someone want to suggest a seafaring rope known as kyummel or something?

First of all, Hebrew, Aramaic, Arabic, Greek, English, etc. all have very similar words for camel/gimel/gamal/etc. (The Greek letter Gamma and the Hebrew/Phoenician letter Gimel derive from a drawing of a camel's head. Though, it's probably originally derives from a drawing of a boomerang-like hunting stick with a rhyming name in Demotic, and "throwing-stick" probably got switched to "camel" when the Phoenicians adap…

Just looking it up online as I have no personal knowledge here, the Hebrew word for rope, חבל (hevel, pronounced as ḥ or χ) apparently has shared roots with Arabic, Syriac, Akkadian and Ugaritic that all have similar sounding words and the current guess it that there was a proto-semitic word like "ḥabl" and of course none of those sound like camel or gamal, so you can at least strike Hebrew and Arabic from the list of potential sources of origin.

Re: The camel, the rope, and the needle's eye

#203

Post by NotYourLawyer »

tsimionescu wrote: post #145
DontchaKnowit wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I dont understand why people refuse to take this line as literally as possible - A rich person has as much chance of entering heaven as a camel has of passing through the eye of a needle. Its just a humorous way of saying "fat chance" ... why read into it so much. Never made any sense to me.

The reason why people don't want to take this line literally is very simple: they don't want to believe that they can't live a life of luxury and still go into heaven. If you're both a believer and rich, you can either live with the cognitive dissonance, renounce your faith, or just reinterpret the precepts you don't like to suit you.

Or just understand that people spoke hyperbolically 2000 years ago just like they do now.

Re: The camel, the rope, and the needle's eye

#204

Post by deepsquirrelnet »

robocat wrote: post #38

Even moderately rich people have a variety of loopholes. * Turn a camel into a fine slurry that can be easily put through the eye of a needle. * Commission a very big needle. Or the classic redefinition of rich: most people that complain about the rich always seem to mean someone richer than they are. E.g. If you're writing on HN you are the rich.

I like this direction. But the passage talks about the ease of doing so.

I propose something like a wood chipper attached to a conveyor belt that runs through a giant needle and deposits the remains on the other side. You could use an excavator to lift the camel into the chipper just to make sure there’s almost zero effort involved

In building such a device, you will have saved all of humanity, rich or poor from the eternal fires.

Re: The camel, the rope, and the needle's eye

#205

Post by mminer237 »

grotorea wrote: post #185
thfuran wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Without knowing the expression, “camel through a needle’s eye” sounds a bit fanciful, like there must be some sort of fairy-tale exception or trick to make it work But isn't that the whole point?

Good point but since the whole controversy is about what's the correct point of view to be defended, it depends. My guess: the "fairy-tale exception or trick" could be simply divine mercy towards the rich he feels are deserving. The rich can get into heaven not through brute force but through God's will.

The point of Christ's teaching is that rich or poor, no one is deserving. It's only by admitting one's sinfulness and inadequacy and turning from it to instead accept God's mercy and gift of Christ that anyone can be saved.

Re: The camel, the rope, and the needle's eye

#206

Post by bee_rider »

thfuran wrote: post #164
bee_rider wrote: post #153

I guess the fact that “big animal through a needle’s eye” was a common expression would make it more obvious. But, without knowing it, I kind of thought the rope phrasing seemed better. Without knowing the expression, “camel through a needle’s eye” sounds a bit fanciful, like there must be some sort of fairy-tale exception or trick to make it work. Edit: for example maybe camel fur can be made into thread? I don’t kn…

>Without knowing the expression, “camel through a needle’s eye” sounds a bit fanciful, like there must be some sort of fairy-tale exception or trick to make it work But isn't that the whole point?

Seems like he’s telling the guy to sell all his stuff and give it away, or bugger off.

Re: The camel, the rope, and the needle's eye

#207

Post by hprotagonist »

graemep wrote: post #170
brink wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He's written some fantastic books. Worth a read, imo. He's my favorite author.

His fiction as well. The Father Brown stories are better known now because there was a recent TV series but they really did no convey a lot of what was in the books (I only saw an episode or two). Oddly enough, the fiction is more a product of its time and feels more dated to me than the journalism and serious writing of his I have read.

"The Man Who Was Thursday" still works, i found -- which is kind of a surprise!

Re: The camel, the rope, and the needle's eye

#208

Post by bee_rider »

mminer237 wrote: post #205
grotorea wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good point but since the whole controversy is about what's the correct point of view to be defended, it depends. My guess: the "fairy-tale exception or trick" could be simply divine mercy towards the rich he feels are deserving. The rich can get into heaven not through brute force but through God's will.

The point of Christ's teaching is that rich or poor, no one is deserving. It's only by admitting one's sinfulness and inadequacy and turning from it to instead accept God's mercy and gift of Christ that anyone can be saved.

That seems to soften it a bit, in this story he’s saying that the rich particularly have an essentially insurmountable amount of sinfulness and inadequacy to overcome.

Re: The camel, the rope, and the needle's eye

#210

Post by telotortium »

tsimionescu wrote: post #188
otabdeveloper4 wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Such a belief would be heretical and very much outside the bounds of any canonical Christianity. (The phrase you're looking for is "divinely inspired", but Christianity also teaches that all of world history is also divinely inspired. It's a very broad category.)

Isn't it an article of faith for some Christian groups that the King James version of the Bible was produced by 100 scholars each translating a Greek text independently, and each producing the exact same English translation, thus proving that God had directly guided them in this translation, and essentially making the KJV almost literal word of God?

Maybe for some very fringe groups but probably not. That sounds more like someone confusing the KJV with the Septuagint, which has a similar legend - that 70 Hebrew scholars independently produced the same Greek Translation of the Old Testament.
Post reply on HN