[Zancarius]

I agree!

Where this argument pops up is through the modern myth that "eye of a needle" was a reference to a particular gate in Jerusalem (or something similar; there are different variants of this claim). If this were true, then THAT would turn the passage from an impossibility to something that's rather exceedingly difficult, thus pleasing rich people. Rope versus camel doesn't dramatically change the outcome as much as changing the idiom from a literal needle to a gate.

Here's what the IVP commentary says:

19:23–26. Here Jesus clearly uses *hyperbole. His words reflect an ancient Jewish figure of speech for the impossible: a very large animal passing through a needle’s eye. On regular journeys at twenty-eight miles per day, a fully loaded camel could carry four hundred pounds in addition to its rider; such a camel would require a gate at least ten feet high and twelve feet wide. (A needle’s eye in Jesus’ day meant what it means today; the idea that it was simply a name for a small gate in Jerusalem is based on a gate from the medieval period and sheds no light on Jesus’ teaching in the first century.)

Craig S. Keener, The IVP Bible Background Commentary: New Testament, Second Edition. (Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic: An Imprint of InterVarsity Press, 2014), 94.

[Natsu]

> Where this argument pops up is through the modern myth that "eye of a needle" was a reference to a particular gate in Jerusalem

The article says this theory appears as early as the 11th century, which isn't quite "modern."

[Zancarius]

Good point. I guess my view of "modern" with regards to scripture is somewhat warped by the view that anything later than, say, the 7th or 8th centuries is "too new."

Either way, the analogy is anachronistic to the text, which is probably the better way to render it.

[bee_rider]

Clearly we should just combine both of these revisions—tossing some rope through a gate would be easy!

[Zancarius]

I like the way you think!

[vintermann]

> His words reflect an ancient Jewish figure of speech for the impossible

The article claims that the Gospels are the oldest known use of the figure of speech.

[Zancarius]

Maybe, at least in "modern" writing.

The problem I have with that claim is that the phrasing "eye of a needle" appears in Talmudic writings that predate the NT, so the idea itself likely predates that, and other creatures (elephants) have been used instead of camels.

Granted, this is just hair-splitting, but I would strongly suspect its use dates much earlier.

[angiosperm]

There are no Talmudic manuscripts that predate the NT. There is a reasonable inference that much of what is in them does, but there is no guessing which bits those are.

[Zancarius]

Ah interesting, thanks! I didn't realize the only surviving manuscripts for which we have evidence date approximately to the time range of the MT. Whereas the Sinaiticus majuscule is easily 2-4 centuries earlier. Still, I would expect the idiom was well-established by the first century.

[jjeaff]

the version of the eye of the needle being a particular gate in Jerusalem that I heard is that it was a short entrance. so a camel could conceivably go through it, but you would have to take off any provisions it is packing and the camel would have to kneel down to get through. Which I think would square with other teachings of Jesus, which is that a man CAN get into heaven by humbling himself (kneeling) and casting off his worldly possessions first.