Rich man, eye of needle translation

[Loml]

Matthew 19:23** “Again I say to you, it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for one who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.”**

I stumbled upon the following and it makes sense to me:

This phrase relies on an early mistranslation of the Scriptures from Aramaic into Greek. In Aramaic the words for “camel” and “rope” are spelled the same (גמלא, Syriac ܓܡܠܐ, gamlâ) and thus it appears in the Peshitta. The phrase should then read “it is easier for a rope to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God”. (From en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eye_of_a_needle#Christianity)

Is it possible that what Jesus said was written (or repeated) in Aramaic and the real phrase that Christ said was ‘… for a rope to pass through the eye…’?

 

[ConstantineTG]

Matthew 19:23** “Again I say to you, it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for one who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.”**

I stumbled upon the following and it makes sense to me:

This phrase relies on an early mistranslation of the Scriptures from Aramaic into Greek. In Aramaic the words for “camel” and “rope” are spelled the same (גמלא, Syriac ܓܡܠܐ, gamlâ) and thus it appears in the Peshitta. The phrase should then read “it is easier for a rope to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God”. (From en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eye_of_a_needle#Christianity)

Is it possible that what Jesus said was written (or repeated) in Aramaic and the real phrase that Christ said was ‘… for a rope to pass through the eye…’?

A rope still would be too big and impossible to go through a needle.

My priest who’s very good with Scripture (studied it extensively) says that The Eye of the Needle is one of the 12 gates of Jerusalem, and its the smallest one. For a camel to pass through its narrow doorway, you have to remove everything thats on the camel, have the camel go through it. And this relates very well to the message of Jesus, that like the camel the rich people who are attached to their baggage (their material wealth) cannot pass through the Eye of the Needle unless they let go of their attachments.

 

[Loml]

My interpretation of Jesus words’ in either translation would be literal by the way, it makes no difference, the object just has to be too big to go through the eye of a needle.

It’s hard (impossible) for a rich person to love God. Although… after much effort with a rope you may be able to fray it enough times to force it through (This thought just occurred to me and is not my reason for asking about the translation!)

Thank you for your quick response!

 

[Oldtimer_7]

I am puzzled why this little figure of speech stirs so much imagination. It seems to be the Biblical equivalent of an urban legend. The answer is very simple: it is an impossibility. That eliminates gates of Jerusalem, mountain passes, and gateways to houses. Read on and you will see what I mean.
In deference to my hosts, I copy this from the Douay-Rheims-Challoner:

DRC: Luke Chapter 18

[25] For it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.
[26] And they that heard it, said: Who then can be saved?
[27] He said to them: The things that are impossible with men, are possible with God.

 

[Bluegoat]

The gate theory is widely heard, but I believe it is incorrect, and in fact there was no such gate. And that would have to be a pretty small gate in any case. Someone told me once where this story originated, but I can’t remember now I’m afraid.

The rope explanation is the correct one as far as I know, and it specifically means the large ropes used for tying boats and ships. As a metaphor it makes a lot more sense.

In any case, the meaning is the same, whether is is a big camel and a small gate, a rope and a needle, or a camel and a needle.

 

[ProVobis]

If we’re discussing details here, maybe the more important question is what determines the richness of the person who should be worrying here. Cannot we try to attain a modest amount of wealth so we don’t have to beg for food, shelter, etc? We’re all so caught up in translations but what’s the real message here?

 

[Bluegoat]

If we’re discussing details here, maybe the more important question is what determines the richness of the person who should be worrying here. Cannot we try to attain a modest amount of wealth so we don’t have to beg for food, shelter, etc? We’re all so caught up in translations but what’s the real message here?

In the last town I lived in, the local United Church - a middle of the road Protestant group - had a missionary come to speak from Africa. He felt that a large part of the reason Christianity was failing in the West was we are too rich. I think he is probably right.

What we consider to be a modest amount of wealth, from a historical and worldwide perspective, is far more than that. We are by far a society with a huge amount of wealth. We are drowning in stuff, and increased production and more consumption seem to be the primary goals of our governments and societies.

So while I do actually think it is ok to accumulate the daily necessities of life, I think for most of us in the West, that is really not the problem. The problem is really understanding how little we actually need.

 

[rcjones]

If we’re discussing details here, maybe the more important question is what determines the richness of the person who should be worrying here. Cannot we try to attain a modest amount of wealth so we don’t have to beg for food, shelter, etc? We’re all so caught up in translations but what’s the real message here?

The real message is that one who spends his time grasping for an overabundance of earthly things will have problems letting go of them. It is the heart of the person being addressed, not the amount of wealth that makes him rich.

It is the same teaching as “store up your treasures in heaven” but taught from the negative.

The key is “it is impossible for men”. Men cannot change their hearts, but God can.

 

[ProVobis]

The real message is that one who spends his time grasping for an overabundance of earthly things will have problems letting go of them. It is the heart of the person being addressed, not the amount of wealth that makes him rich.

It is the same teaching as “store up your treasures in heaven” but taught from the negative.

The key is “it is impossible for men”. Men cannot change their hearts, but God can.

Now we’re getting somewhere. Thanks.

 

[Loml]

Thanks for your (name removed by moderator)ut but I don’t think I’m having trouble interpreting the meaning.

Is there a reason not to use the word ‘rope’ instead of ‘camel’?

 

[JM3]

Thanks for your (name removed by moderator)ut but I don’t think I’m having trouble interpreting the meaning.

Is there a reason not to use the word ‘rope’ instead of ‘camel’?

Because the Holy Spirit said so.

 

[JRKH]

A rope still would be too big and impossible to go through a needle.

My priest who’s very good with Scripture (studied it extensively) says that The Eye of the Needle is one of the 12 gates of Jerusalem, and its the smallest one. For a camel to pass through its narrow doorway, you have to remove everything thats on the camel, have the camel go through it. And this relates very well to the message of Jesus, that like the camel the rich people who are attached to their baggage (their material wealth) cannot pass through the Eye of the Needle unless they let go of their attachments.

I have heard this too, but I have also heard that there is no recorded evidence for there being such a gate.

Peace
James

 

[Loml]

Because the Holy Spirit said so.

Respectfully, in either translation the meaning is retained, so I don’t accept your response.

Thanks

 

[the_Assyrian_1]

Matthew 19:23** “Again I say to you, it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for one who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.”**

I stumbled upon the following and it makes sense to me:

This phrase relies on an early mistranslation of the Scriptures from Aramaic into Greek. In Aramaic the words for “camel” and “rope” are spelled the same (גמלא, Syriac ܓܡܠܐ, gamlâ) and thus it appears in the Peshitta. The phrase should then read “it is easier for a rope to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God”. (From en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eye_of_a_needle#Christianity)

Is it possible that what Jesus said was written (or repeated) in Aramaic and the real phrase that Christ said was ‘… for a rope to pass through the eye…’?

dear Opening Thread,
I myself being Assyrian and familiar with the Peshitta in small way, would recommend you stick with NJB translation of the Word, to me a native Assyrian, the sentence reads literal… this being the nature of the language…NJB Translation.

Dont not forget those with Jesus and the Lord himself had forsaken all to preach the Gospel when he had said this…

I also heard the abomintion of television Jeering at the likihood of their being a gate… I sugggest you read the early Church fathers (St Cyprian 258A.D. being one) in relation to your wealth…

Did you know 20,000 Children die every day because of hunger… ?? not mentioning any other problem in the world…

It is right… money is the Evil of the world, no one can serve both God and mammon… (money)…

Price of the Tower you build, remember, will cost you everything you have, Jesus said this…

“He who does not forsake his own life and take up his cross is not worthy of Me”

“I came to set a fire upon the earth and how I wish it had already been kindled”…

We serve a passionate and Jealous God… there fear him, and become blameless…

I beleive this involves living in moderation. This is a virtue… read up on it, its a most wonderful subject!!1

Be blessed!!!

brother mark

 

[patrick457]

Matthew 19:23** “Again I say to you, it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for one who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.”**

I stumbled upon the following and it makes sense to me:

This phrase relies on an early mistranslation of the Scriptures from Aramaic into Greek. In Aramaic the words for “camel” and “rope” are spelled the same (גמלא, Syriac ܓܡܠܐ, gamlâ) and thus it appears in the Peshitta. The phrase should then read “it is easier for a rope to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God”. (From en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eye_of_a_needle#Christianity)

Is it possible that what Jesus said was written (or repeated) in Aramaic and the real phrase that Christ said was ‘… for a rope to pass through the eye…’?

The metaphor of a big animal entering something small such as a needle’s eye is actually quite known and oft-used in Jewish literature, so the text as we have it today still makes sense within context:

R. Samuel b. Nahmani said in the name of R. Jonathan: “A man is shown in a dream only what is suggested by his own thoughts, as it says, ‘As for you, O king, your thoughts came into your mind upon your bed.’ Or if you like, I can derive it from here: ‘That you may know the thoughts of the heart.’ (Daniel 2:29; 30)” Rava said: “This is proved by the fact that a man is never shown in a dream a date palm of gold, or an elephant going through the eye of a needle.”

• Berakhot 55a

Rabbi Issi said, “The Holy One, blessed be He, said to Israel, ‘Present to me an opening of repentance no bigger than the eye of a needle, and I will widen it into openings through which wagons and carriages can pass’.”

• Song of Songs Rabbah 5.2

That being said, there are a few late Greek manuscipts (579 1424 pc) which read κάμιλον (kamilon, “cable, rope”; the one used to secure ships when docking)) for κάμηλον (kamēlon, “camel”), either through misreading of the Greek text - the two words are homophonic in Koine and later Greek - or intentionally, perhaps to soften Jesus’ words. And yes, George Lamsa and other folks did and do point out that the word for “camel” and “rope” are spelled identically - גמלא. No matter whether you choose to read ‘camel’ or ‘cable/hawser/rope’ here, the sense is still pretty much the same.

Also, there is no evidence in nonbiblical sources or in ancient commentaries that there was a narrow gate or a gorge in Jerusalem - or in any other ancient Near Eastern city - called “[eyes of the] needles”, something even the Jerome Biblical Commentary affirms: “the figure of the camel and the eye of the needle means exactly what is said; it does not refer to a cable or a small gate of Jerusalem.” It seems the ‘gate’ story originated in the eleventh century, when Archbishop Theophylact of Ohrid - writer of a number of commentaries on the Bible - wrote that there was a gate in Jerusalem. We need to remember that (1) Theophylact probably never visited Jerusalem personally, and (2) the walls of the city were torn down twice before his time. As noted though, there is no evidence for such a very small and narrow gate existing in 1st century Jerusalem (or any other ancient city), nor do we have any lawsuits sueing the architect who made such a failure , and the simplest solution to the dilemma - I’m using Ockham’s Razor here - is that the ‘eye of a needle’ is just that, a literal needle’s eye.

 

[5tunate]

Yes, I came across this in two places. One was a book on comparative religions that offered this as a correct alternative along with a few other examples, all of which I found interesting. It is also one of the chief examples used by Dr. George Lamsa, a native Aramaic speaker and Bible translator.* The way I understand it is that the letter group for “rope” and “camel”, Aramaic being written without vowels, punctuation or capitalization, demands contextual consistency in translation. While "camel’ may have been used through piety, ignorance, or some other reason, in the context of “needle” the obvious choice is “rope” as often such similes use exaggeration. “Rope” might be the obvious exaggeration of “thread.”

The comparative religion book offered three sentences in all caps with no vowels and challenged the reader to “translate” though they were in English. It was surprisingly difficult!

In either case, it would seem to me that someone using this as an instructive text would benefit by either translation, the idea of excessive self importance being a deterrent to entry being obvious. But it is nice to have it as accurate as possible according to the best info we have, some of that as applied to translation being much improved after the 50’s, according to many.

*I believe his work can be found on line.

 

[Oldtimer_7]

Patrick457, thanks for the in-depth research. I went back to the Sacra Pagina commentaries on Luke and Matthew and found allusions to manuscripts that have “rope” instead of “camel.” Daniel Harrington, SJ, also alludes to rabbinical literature using the image of an elephant and the eye of a needle, but gives no reference. You rounded that out for me.

 

[TMC]

People are always trying to find some way to interpret this passage in a way that makes it OK to be rich, or at least a little rich. Whether “eye of a needle” is a symbol for something else, or camel is mistranslated, or whatever, the meaning is clear. It is very difficult, and perhaps impossible, to be rich and also be in Christ.

 

[PJM]

=Loml;7180796]Matthew 19:23** “Again I say to you, it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for one who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.”**

I stumbled upon the following and it makes sense to me:

This phrase relies on an early mistranslation of the Scriptures from Aramaic into Greek. In Aramaic the words for “camel” and “rope” are spelled the same (גמלא, Syriac ܓܡܠܐ, gamlâ) and thus it appears in the Peshitta. The phrase should then read “it is easier for a rope to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God”. (From en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eye_of_a_needle#Christianity)

Is it possible that what Jesus said was written (or repeated) in Aramaic and the real phrase that Christ said was ‘… for a rope to pass through the eye…’?

Either way the meaning is clear, constant and reasonable: WE [all of us] must take care not to allow “other gods” of our own making, our own choosing get in the way of the RIGHT practice of our Faith. God offers salvation BUT it remains up to us to choose it an cooperate with wht is ncessary to attain it.

 

[Loml]

The metaphor of a big animal entering something small such as a needle’s eye is actually quite known and oft-used in Jewish literature, so the text as we have it today still makes sense within context:

R. Samuel b. Nahmani said in the name of R. Jonathan: “A man is shown in a dream only what is suggested by his own thoughts, as it says, ‘As for you, O king, your thoughts came into your mind upon your bed.’ Or if you like, I can derive it from here: ‘That you may know the thoughts of the heart.’ (Daniel 2:29; 30)” Rava said: “This is proved by the fact that a man is never shown in a dream a date palm of gold, or an elephant going through the eye of a needle.”

• Berakhot 55a

Rabbi Issi said, “The Holy One, blessed be He, said to Israel, ‘Present to me an opening of repentance no bigger than the eye of a needle, and I will widen it into openings through which wagons and carriages can pass’.”

• Song of Songs Rabbah 5.2

Thank you for this information

Either way the meaning is clear, constant and reasonable: WE [all of us] must take care not to allow “other gods” of our own making, our own choosing get in the way of the RIGHT practice of our Faith. God offers salvation BUT it remains up to us to choose it an cooperate with wht is ncessary to attain it.

I was never asking about the interpretation, I have written that the meaning is the same regardless of translation. I wish I’d stated this in the first post but I foolishly expected people to address my question:

Is it possible that what Jesus said was written (or repeated) in Aramaic and the real phrase that Christ said was ‘… for a rope to pass through the eye…’?

Anyway, my question is answered. Thanks everyone