Live data from Hacker News

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

kiwihellenist.blogspot.com

41–50 of 298 posts

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

#41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, some aspects of Islam seem to be based on the views of the Ebionites, an early Christian sect who used a Hebrew version of Matthew (instead of Greek) and whose beliefs about Jesus (not God, didn't actually die, etc.) ended up in Islam.

We say now “some sect”, but today’s mainstream Trinitarians were also considered “just some sect” in Early Christianity. It has turned out to become the mainstream view, but really trinitarianism and antitrinitarianism are both valid views of Christianity and Islam stems from the “back to the basics” antitrinitarian view. While we’re at it, Judaism was also developed contemporarily with Christianity and not before (a…

Trinitarianism isn't necessarily a strictly Christian construct—or rather the idea of a godhead comprising multiple parts. "Two Powers" theology (a transcendent, unseeable Yahweh; and Yahweh-as-man) was accepted by Jewish thinkers until about the First Century AD, largely due to Christian influences. It's visible in passages like Genesis 19:24 (two Yahwehs) and most "angel of the Lord" language (e.g. Judges 6:11ff).

Alan Segal's Two Powers in Heaven delves into this in great detail.

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

#42
post #4

Meh. You don't get (or stay) rich by being all that concerned about your fate in the hereafter. I'd say that the seriously rich (and serious wanna-bes) are far more interested in Matthew 4:8-9. And in doing whatever it takes, to hopefully receive such an offer themselves.

Mammon is an easy idolatry.

I like this. I literally just caught that word in a commentary I was reading on Sunday. Sadly, English translations sometimes don't convey the force or cultural context of the passage.

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

#43

In Aramaic, the language Jesus spoke, the word for camel is gamlo (ܓܐܡܠܐ) while the word for rope is gamla (ܓܐܡܠܥ). Mixing these up would be an easy mistake to make. Matthew and Luke both took some info from Mark but also took some info from the Q source and their own sources. Since all three have this same wording, it is likely the error came through Mark.

I think there's enough evidence to suggest that whoever the people that wrote Matthew and Luke were, they were capable of introducing their own errors, along with embellishments, from their source material.

Given they wrote in Koine, and exhibit some ignorance of the geography of the area, and almost definitely never met anyone that met Jesus, it's reasonable to assume no spoken Aramaic accounts were part of their source material.

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

#44
Huh. I thought the camel/needle's eye thing was about a small narrow gate into Jerusalem. You can get a camel through it, but it needs to get down on its knees and crawl. Apparently, camels don't like to do that.

But I've never seen the gate, and don't have strong views on biblical accuracy.

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

#45

I've never really understood the sentences following this quote. > '[…] It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.' They were greatly astounded and said to one another, 'Then who can be saved?' Jesus looked at them and said, 'For mortals it is impossible, but not for God; for God all things are possible.' Why do the apostles seem to think that…

Let's look at the context before the quote too: Mark 10:17-27 (NLT)

> As Jesus was starting out on his way to Jerusalem, a man came running up to him, knelt down, and asked, "Good Teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?"

> "Why do you call me good?" Jesus asked. "Only God is truly good. But to answer your question, you know the commandments: 'You must not murder. You must not commit adultery. You must not steal. You must not testify falsely. You must not cheat anyone. Honor your father and mother.'"

> "Teacher," the man replied, "I've obeyed all these commandments since I was young."

> Looking at the man, Jesus felt genuine love for him. "There is still one thing you haven't done," he told him. "Go and sell all your possessions and give the money to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me."

> At this the man's face fell, and he went away sad, for he had many possessions.

> Jesus looked around and said to his disciples, "How hard it is for the rich to enter the Kingdom of God!" This amazed them. But Jesus said again, "Dear children, it is very hard to enter the Kingdom of God. In fact, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich person to enter the Kingdom of God!"

> The disciples were astounded. "Then who in the world can be saved?" they asked.

> Jesus looked at them intently and said, "Humanly speaking, it is impossible. But not with God. Everything is possible with God."

Jesus's analogy about a camel going through the eye of a needle is commentary on the situation that he and his disciples just witnessed. The rich man thinks that he can earn his way into heaven through good deeds: he's asking "what must I do to inherit eternal life", and probably hoping for a pat on the back from Jesus for all the good things he's done. But instead Jesus identifies a much deeper issue in his life: his earthly wealth is more important to him than anything else, even his eternal destiny! The point of the camel analogy is that riches are a distraction that make it impossible to "love the Lord your God with all your heart, all your soul, all your mind, and all your strength."

> Surely from what he's said it's obvious that poor people can be saved. And when Jesus says 'for God all things are possible', isn't he implying that some rich people might get into heaven? So why do people interpret the passage as Jesus saying this is impossible?

The central point of the Bible is that there are no "good people". Everyone is morally corrupt in one way or another, and cannot be saved through their own effort, only through Jesus's sacrifice on the cross. "God saved you by his grace when you believed. And you can’t take credit for this; it is a gift from God. Salvation is not a reward for the good things we have done, so none of us can boast about it." (Ephesians 2:8-9, cf. Romans 3, Psalm 14, John 14). A lot (most?) of Jesus's teachings, including the passage in the OP, are addressed to people who think they are "good enough" and showing them to be self-righteous, hypocritical, and in need of salvation just as badly as everybody else.

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

#46
post #12

Well apparently the same analogy is used in the Quran as well. https://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=7&verse=40

Yes, some aspects of Islam seem to be based on the views of the Ebionites, an early Christian sect who used a Hebrew version of Matthew (instead of Greek) and whose beliefs about Jesus (not God, didn't actually die, etc.) ended up in Islam.

Islam isn't based on Christianity or Judasim. Rather is the the revival/continuation of the one message which is monotheism, given to every prophet and messenger throughout history. It would not be unfound for overlap in teachings between the prophets as they are ultimately upon one religion.

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

#47
post #13

I'm predisposed to mysticism, so I probably read this passage a lot less mundanely than most. I'm also a minimalist and tend to view spiritual teachings as enigmatic ways of pointing out something obvious that we are conditioned to overlook. To me, this passage says: "You don't get to keep anything."

[deleted]

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

#49

I don't buy the idea that changing camel to rope is about pleasing rich people, because a rope can still nowhere near get through the eye of a needle. But a rope is qualitatively the same kind of thing as a thread; so if camel is the right word, the message is that what gets into the kingdom of God is a whole different kind of thing than money.

[deleted]

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

#50

I don't buy the idea that changing camel to rope is about pleasing rich people, because a rope can still nowhere near get through the eye of a needle. But a rope is qualitatively the same kind of thing as a thread; so if camel is the right word, the message is that what gets into the kingdom of God is a whole different kind of thing than money.

> I don't buy the idea that changing camel to rope is about pleasing rich people, because a rope can still nowhere near get through the eye of a needle. I agree, considering the prosperity gospel types have found a way to reinterpret the analogy literally, claiming that Jesus was actually talking about a gateway to Jerusalem called the Eye of the Needle[1] that required those with goods to hand them through the Eye t…

the article discusses the origin of this other specious interpretation at some length
Post reply on HN