That's not in the Bible

[BAFRIEND]

the Bible states that we are to be rich enouph to have a huge needle forged

then you ride a camel through the eye of that huge needle...

presto, you get to go to heaven

 

[SolomonVII]

the Bible states that we are to be rich enouph to have a huge needle forged

then you ride a camel through the eye of that huge needle...

presto, you get to go to heaven

Now that's what I call a loophole.

 

[Lady Bug]

never mind

 

[AMDG]

the Bible states that we are to be rich enouph to have a huge needle forged

then you ride a camel through the eye of that huge needle...

You mean you were never told that the "eye of a needle" referred to a city gate and the difficulty is because the rich pile blankets upon blankets so high upon the camels that they ride so that it's hard for them to get through the gates or "eye of the needles"?

 

[MoreCoffee]

I reckon that city gate story is a fiction.

 

[AMDG]

I reckon that city gate story is a fiction.

What's easier to believe--a city gate being called the "eye of the needle" or having to forge a gigantic needle?

 

[MoreCoffee]

What's easier to believe--a city gate being called the "eye of the needle" or having to forge a gigantic needle?

Forging a gigantic needle is easier to believe because we know what a gigantic needle is and it is possible to make one but we have no evidence, known to me, of any gate in Jerusalem being called "the eye of the needle" nor that any such gate (if it existed) was called by that name BECAUSE one had to humble oneself (or one's camel) to get through it.

 

[SolomonVII]

When it comes to understanding the Bible, the possibilities are endless.


Eye of a Needle

Lastly however, is the explanation which seems the most likely. Most Christians realize that the Gospels weren't originally written in English. Some think they were written in Latin, most believe they were first written in Greek. Very possibly though, some if not all were written in the language of Yeshua and His followers, Aramaic. This language was all but forgotten until about a hundred years ago, which is why few students are familiar with it. Dr. George Lamsa, who has written extensively about the language and in his book entitled "Gospel Light" clarifies for us the probable meaning of Yeshua's words concerning the eye of a needle. I will quote from page 167.

"The Aramaic word gamla means camel, a large rope and a beam. The meaning of the word is determined by its context. If the word riding or burden occurs then gamla means a camel, but when the eye of a needle is mentioned gamla more correctly means a rope. There is no connection anywhere in Aramaic speech or literature between camel and needle, but there is a definite connection between rope and needle."
​

Most English versions of the Gospels came from Greek texts by translators who may have known nothing about Aramaic. Thus "camel" would have been translated instead of "rope". It takes little effort to imagine Yeshua, while walking along the sea coast, pointing to a rope and saying, "It is easier for a camel [a gamla, a rope] to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God".

 

[SolomonVII]

Eye of a needle - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

But we must not forget that Jesus was not just Aramaic, but Jewish too.

 

[MoreCoffee]

So, folk speculate that the Lord's saying may have meant that it is easier to pass a rope through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter heaven?

Or is the theory about a gate called "the eye of the needle" documented in ancient sources?

 

[AMDG]

So, folk speculate that the Lord's saying may have meant that it is easier to pass a rope through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter heaven?

Or is the theory about a gate called "the eye of the needle" documented in ancient sources?

Don't know. Haven't felt the need to look it up. However I do know that nothing is impossible with God (Luke 1:37 and Luke 18:27) and the rich may indeed be described as keeping the Commandments (Luke 18:20) and Luke 18:24 seems to indicate that Jesus still loved the man. As a matter of fact, it seems that "leaving all" to follow Jesus (the distributing all the riches and following after the itinerant Jesus) simply meant that the man would then have "riches in heaven" if he did (Luke 18:22) not that he would be doomed to hell if he didn't. Besides common sense tells us that what's "riches" to one person is simply "having the basics covered" to another (there must be a reason the Ten Commandments includes those not coveting commands and the one about not stealing).

 

[MoreCoffee]

It is useful to be curious enough to learn the facts.