a hole of needle

Originally Posted by psychoslice

Also it has been debated that the word camel was actually meant to be, rope.

rope...really, tell me more...

nightowl

[psychoslice]

"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".

Thanks psychoslice, yet another case of poor translation by those who didn't understand the original language.

nightowl

Originally Posted by psychoslice

Also it has been debated that the word camel was actually meant to be, rope.

But ropes/thread are meant to go through needles, camels are not. The hyperbolic statement Jesus is making isn't as weighty if the original word was 'rope'. :P

Originally Posted by Zenith

But ropes/thread are meant to go through needles, camels are not. The hyperbolic statement Jesus is making isn't as weighty if the original word was 'rope'. :P

Your right Zenith, it doesn't invoke the seem powerful image and message as a camel going through the eye of a needle.

nightowl

[Silver]

Interesting ~ I wonder if our fellow SF-ian, RabiO (?) could assist in a more accurate accounting of this? Oh RabiO...

[RabbiO]

Originally Posted by Silvergirl

Interesting ~ I wonder if our fellow SF-ian, RabiO (?) could assist in a more accurate accounting of this? Oh RabiO...

One of the issues that has never been completely resolved is the question as to what language or languages were Christian scripture originally written.

In all probability Aramaic was the primary spoken language in Judea during Jesus' lifetime. There has been research by a group of scholars from Hebrew University that suggests that Hebrew was not quite the dead spoken language that many have thought during the time of Jesus, but the extent of its use, especially among the common populace is unknown.

There is a minority of scholars, which does not necessarily make them wrong, but again not necessarily right - who believe, for a variety of reasons, that Christian scripture was originally written in Aramaic. There are several different websites -some agreeing with that supposition, some refuting it (I leave it to you to make your own determination).

It is true that Aramaic, just as Hebrew, is written without vowels. The consonants that spell the word "camel" in Aramaic also spell the word for "rope." There is, therefore, a certain logic in saying what does a camel have to do with a needle, while seeing the logic of saying how can a thick rope pass through the eye of needle which is meant to have thin thread go through it. (Interestingly, the same consonants also spell "camel" in Hebrew, but do not spell "rope.")

One more thing to add to mix, for your consideration, is that there are two passages in the Talmud that deal with the difficulty of an elephant passing through the eye of a needle. (No the Hebrew word for "elephant" does not also spell the word for "rope.")

Although obviously an elephant is not a camel, there is an obvious animal analogy based on the size of the animal compared to the eye of a needle. There may have been varying regional changes in idiomatic expressions. It does leave open the possibility that no matter what the original language was the word meant to be used is, in fact, camel.

For me it is an interesting question, no more than that, it not being my scripture, but I hope you found this to be of some help.

B'shalom,

Peter

Just a thought, maybe Jesus chose to use the word camel instead of elephant because they were more readily used in that area and he would often teach using familiar things from the culture around him and the people he was addressing...Maybe he knew the story as RabbiO had alluded to but changed the animal to fit the surroundings...just a guess on my part.

nightowl

[Silver]

Orig quote by RabiO~~~Although obviously an elephant is not a camel, there is an obvious animal analogy based on the size of the animal compared to the eye of a needle. There may have been varying regional changes in idiomatic expressions. It does leave open the possibility that no matter what the original language was the word meant to be used is, in fact, camel.

Ok, then, so elephant, camel, whatever it won't fit through "the eye of the needle". Next question I have then would be, was there in use the phrase "eye of the needle" or similar to describe those narrow doorways in the walls that surround cities and settlements in those days?

Thanks for your help on the 'camel' issue, RabiO~*

Originally Posted by Thinker108

Jesus says a camel can pass from a hole of needle but not a rich person. Do you believe in this statement?

Yes that sounds about right.