Evolution as a theory of creation is a JOKE

[AV1611VET]

This interpretation is based on no ancient evidence, and anything remotely like it was first advanced (in the suggestion that there was a particular narrow Jerusalem gate nick-named "The Eye of the Needle") in the ninth century, by someone with no direct knowledge of the Middle East (a Greek, if memory serves).

In other words, it's just something somebody made up because he didn't like what the Bible actually said.

It could also be a reference to rock formations.

 

[Morcova]

It could also be a reference to rock formations.

Except there's no evidence for that, so it's just more likely that they are making it up.

 

[sfs]

It could also be a reference to rock formations.

It could also be a reference to anything at all, anywhere in the universe. There is no good evidence to suggest that it refers to rock formations, however, or to city gates, or to volcanoes on Mars, or to any of the myriad other possibilities.

 

[AV1611VET]

Except there's no evidence for that, so it's just more likely that they are making it up.

In view of the fact that Jesus said it, I highly doubt it.

And equating "no evidence for..." with "likely that they are making it up" is no way to debate.

That might work with the physical sciences, but not with history.

Scholars at one time said the Medes didn't exist, until archaeologists found them.

 

[AV1611VET]

It could also be a reference to anything at all anywhere in the universe.

No, it can't --- it's certainly not a reference to my front door, or my neighbor's, or their neighbor's, or...

There is no good evidence to suggest that it refers to rock formations...

...

...

 

[AirPo]

No, it can't --- it's certainly not a reference to my front door, or my neighbor's, or their neighbor's, or...

...

...

Too easy.

 

[sbvera13]

AV still hasn't explained why he believes Jesus didn't make up stories to teach a lesson when Jesus himself says he did.

 

[LifeToTheFullest!]

Whoa, whatd' I miss?? The "eye of a needle" is actually a rock formation? And if it is a rock formation, wouldn't that be pretty easy for a camel to go through?
Just sayin'.

 

[Cabal]

And equating "no evidence for..." with "likely that they are making it up" is no way to debate.

Yeah, keep that in mind.

 

[sfs]

And equating "no evidence for..." with "likely that they are making it up" is no way to debate.

We have 800 years worth of evidence of Christians commenting on Jesus' statement without any hint that it referred to a gate; we also have a fair bit of evidence about first century Jerusalem, which give zero support for the association of needle eyes and city gates. Then we have someone, physically and culturally removed from Jesus' context, claiming that there had been a gate named "The Eye of the Camel" in Jerusalem. Given the propensity of commentators to make stuff up, it is indeed likely that this particular gloss was invented.

Scholars at one time said the Medes didn't exist, until archaeologists found them.

No, scholars never said that. The historical record of the Medes has never been lost. You're probably thinking of the Hittites.

 

[AV1611VET]

We have 800 years worth of evidence of Christians commenting on Jesus' statement without any hint that it referred to a gate; we also have a fair bit of evidence about first century Jerusalem, which give zero support for the association of needle eyes and city gates.

Whatever it was, it existed in Jesus' time, and He used it to make a point.

No, scholars never said that. The historical record of the Medes has never been lost. You're probably thinking of the Hittites.

Thanks for the correction.

 

[LifeToTheFullest!]

Whatever it was, it existed in Jesus' time, and He used it to make a point.Thanks for the correction.

Fixed: Googled "eye of the needle"

Second listing:

Mangled Greek maybe?

There are some differences in the transmitted Greek. The needle in Matthew and Mark is a rafic. In Luke it is a belone. But both are synonyms for needles used in sewing, but Luke's is more likely to be used by a surgeon than a seamstress.

Another possible solution comes from the possibility of a Greek misprint. The suggestion is that the Greek word kamilos ('camel') should really be kamêlos, meaning 'cable, rope', as some late New Testament manuscripts1 actually have here. Hence it is easier to thread a needle with a rope rather than a strand of cotton than for a rich man to enter the kingdom. A neat but unnecessary solution!

A variation on all of the above is that the needle was a 6 inch carpet needle and the rope was made of camel hair- but this is again clutching at straws or camel hair, and is an unnecessary emendation.

 

[AV1611VET]

Mangled Greek maybe?

I'm not familiar with Greek --- mangled or otherwise.

I'm a KJVO literalist.

 

[LifeToTheFullest!]

I'm not familiar with Greek --- mangled or otherwise.

I'm a KJVO literalist.

Ah, I see what your problem is.

 

[gaara4158]

Fixed: Googled "eye of the needle"

Second listing:

Mangled Greek maybe?

There are some differences in the transmitted Greek. The needle in Matthew and Mark is a rafic. In Luke it is a belone. But both are synonyms for needles used in sewing, but Luke's is more likely to be used by a surgeon than a seamstress.

Another possible solution comes from the possibility of a Greek misprint. The suggestion is that the Greek word kamilos ('camel') should really be kamêlos, meaning 'cable, rope', as some late New Testament manuscripts1 actually have here. Hence it is easier to thread a needle with a rope rather than a strand of cotton than for a rich man to enter the kingdom. A neat but unnecessary solution!

A variation on all of the above is that the needle was a 6 inch carpet needle and the rope was made of camel hair- but this is again clutching at straws or camel hair, and is an unnecessary emendation.

SFS and I definitely said this 2 pages ago

 

[Nathan Poe]

I'm not familiar with Greek --- mangled or otherwise.

I'm a KJVO literalist.

You just abandoned KJVO literalism in favor of other people's extrabiblical interpretation not too long ago as soon as it was convenient for you to do so -- or have you already forgotten?

 

[gaara4158]

I'm not familiar with Greek --- mangled or otherwise.

I'm a KJVO literalist.

No you're not---you hardly believe anything the Bible teaches.

 

[BananaSlug]

I'm not familiar with Greek --- mangled or otherwise.

I'm a KJVO literalist.

Original Hebrew/Greek pwns KJV.

 

[CraigBaugher]

Matthew 19:24
Original Greek:
palin de legO humeis eukopOteros eimi kamElos dia trupEma rhaphis dierchomai E plousios eiserchomai eis ho basileia ho theos

English Translation:
Again YET I-AM-sayING to-YOU easier it-IS CAMEL through BORE OF-SEWer (needle) to-be-coming-through than rich-man to-be-entering INTO THE KINGdom OF-THE God.

My Translation:
Again I am saying to you, it is easier (for a) camel (to go) through bore of needle, than (a) rich man to enter into the Kingdom of God.

Although I fail to see the importance of this side debate.

My point is, there are too many species of plants, animals, insects, fowl, fish, etc., to all to have evolved. God created them.

We humans like to believe we are smart, but even today, we have not a clue as to the age of the universe, because lack the knowledge needed to make that type of, "matter of fact" statement. We guess, 8-18+ billion years. We do not understand TIME or SPEED of anything outside our immediate environment. Oh... we can guess, but how fast is the universe expanding, true is, we have not a clue. What is faster than light? Well... God is... and if something is moving faster than light, how much could they do in a day? If something was capable of moving a hundred times the speed of light, a 1000 times the speed of light, how much could they do in one of our days. Can time stop?

It takes millions of years to create a diamond in nature, but only seconds today in manufacturing. Yet, masters jewelers are fooled. If we can create a Million year old diamond is seconds, you don't believe a creator that created everything could create a planet and fool us?

 

[sfs]

Matthew 19:24
Original Greek:
palin de legO humeis eukopOteros eimi kamElos dia trupEma rhaphis dierchomai E plousios eiserchomai eis ho basileia ho theos

Those are the right Greek words, but that's not the Greek text -- it's got the words in the right order, but in their standard, uninflected forms, rather than the way they're actually used in a sentence. The actual text reads (in the Nestle-Aland 22nd edition):

palin de legO humin, eukopOteron estin kamElon [alt. reading kamilon] dia trEmatos [alt. reading trupEmatos] rhaphidos eiselthein [alt. reading dielthein] E plousion eis tEn basileian tou theou.

It is the alternate reading for kamElon (kamilon) that would be translated as rope or cable.