I had not “hidden agenda.” I did a seach for ‘bible camel eye needle’ and found this site which reminded me of when Jesus “…asked his disciples, saying, whom do men say that I, the Son of man, am? And they said, some say that thou art John the Baptist; some Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets. He saith unto them, but whom say ye that I am? And Simon Peter answered and said, thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. And Jesus said unto him, blessed art thou, Simon Bar-Jona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee but my Father which is in heaven.” Matthew 16:13-17.
But apparently not paragraphs.
But anyway, what does any of this have to do with the topic? Did you just come here to preach?
Paragraphs are man’s invention to make it easier for those that can’t figure it out for themselves.
Well, we know he didn’t choose the words to refer to any gate in Jeruslem (if he, in fact, said them at all. Strictly speaking, all we know is that the author of Mark claimed he said them).
Personally, I think it’s likely that some scribe somewhere just miscopied the Greek word for rope (kamilon) as kamelon.
I really think this is a case where people want there to be a loophole, but there probably isn’t.
Yes, poor communication is always the fault of the audience.
The site says ‘The Straight Dope fighting ignorance since 1973.’ The question was to Cecil’s Mailbag was “What’s the meaning of Jesus’ teaching about the camel going through the eye of a needle?”
There were speculations given by the Straight Dope Science Advisory Board but no answer. But I know there is an answer and I suggested mine.
"Now while Paul waited for them in Athens, his spirit was stirred in him, when he saw the city wholly given to idolotry. Therefore disputed he in the synagoge with the Jews, and with the devout persons, and in the market daily with them that met with him. Then certain philosophers of the Epicureans, and of the Stoics, encountered him. And some said, what will this babbler say? other some, He seemeth to be a setter forth of strange gods: because he preached unto them Jesus, and the resurrection. Acts 17:16-18. What has this to do with the topic? Do you know what the topic was?
“Theophylact notes, that by this word is meant a cable rope, but Caninius alleges out of the Talmuds that it is a proverb, and the word Camel signifies the beast itself.” Geneva Study Bible
Dear Straight Dope:
I just read Dex and Diane’s writeup in MAILBAG about the meaning of Jesus’ teaching about the camel going through the eye of a needle. There is another possibility, however. The greek word for camel “kamelos” is very close to the word “kamilos” which means cable or rope. Some interpreters believe that there was a corruption in the pre-Gospel oral traditions, or possibly a copyist’s error that switched these two words. If this is true, the proverb would 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 heaven.” This, they believe, would be a much more reasonable and easily understood metaphor. --Patrick
SDSTAFF CKDextHavn replies:
Well, perhaps, but the preponderance of scholars would say no. The word used is “kamelos” (camel) in all of the early manuscripts up to about 400 AD. After that point “kamilos” (heavy rope) turned up in a handful of manuscripts, a few translations, and some commentators’ notes.
The confusion may arise partly from the fact that Greek vowel sounds were changing during this period. The “eta” (e) was now pronounced the same as the “iota” (i). Nonetheless, the early manuscripts are unanimous in reading “camel.”
There’s a principle in New Testament studies that when ancient manuscripts differ slightly in their wording, the manuscript with the most difficult reading is probably correct. We often hear what we expect to hear; so a copyist would be more likely to mistakenly substitute an unsurprising word for an odd one than the other way around. For example, if the original reading were “rope,” and a copyist accidentally wrote “camel,” that would be a jarring enough mistake to be caught the first time you read it. But a copyist might read “camel” and think, “that can’t be right–they must have meant ‘rope’”–and thus introduce an error, thinking it was a correction. So, while “rope” is more reasonable and more easily understood; that’s an argument against it being the original thought!
More likely Jesus was using intentionally grotesque language, like later rabbis who spoke of an elephant going through the eye of a needle.
–SDSTAFF CKDextHavn
Straight Dope Science Advisory Board
http://www.straightdope.com/mailbag/mrichma2.html
Yep. That’s the consensus. The Jesus Seminar says it was probably comic hyperbole. Fine by me. As long as we can all agree that the “needle gate” thing is a myth.
Next time I dictate a letter to you, I will say in my dictaphone, “New Paragraph,”
But was it poor communication when Jesus said “But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you. My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me: and I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand. My Father which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father’s hand. I and my Father are one. Then the Jews took up stones again to stone him. Jesus answered them, many good works have I shewed you from my Father; for which of those works do ye stone me? The Jews answered him, saying, for a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, maketh thyself God.” John 10:26-33.
It was not poor communication, the Jews understood EXACTLY what he meant.
“I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins.” John 8:24.
.
You are wrong. I’m sorry to say it, but it’s simply the case.
See, I know She is pink through faith.
May Her hooves never be shod.
.
.
BTW, Blessedforeverandever, I’ve requested that this thread be moved to our Great Debates forum, as that’s where we generally keep theological discussions and (especially) witnessing. So if it gets moved, please don’t assume anyone’s out to get you or anything, and please feel free to continue the discussion.
.
I think it’s an intensive way of saying, “NO RICH MAN, NO, NO RICH MAN AT ALL, SHALL ENTER INTO MY KINGDOM. It is easier to do [this impossible thing] than for a rich man to enter my kingdom.”
Shakespeare studies, too, for that matter. It’s a basic principle of textual criticism, no matter what the subject text.
Sure, sure - it’s all the other stuff that I was asking about -more of what you’ve said in this thread is off-topic witnessing than on-topic discussions of camels, gates, needles and ropes.
At this website, there’s something called a cite, which is where someone is asked to provide a citation for a supposedly factual statement they have made.
So … do you have a cite showing that the mustard seed is “the smallest of herbs”?
From my experience in Midwest farming, I know that both types of canola (‘rapeseed’) have seeds that are smaller than mustard seeds (both the common yellow mustard, and the smaller brown mustard seeds). And the mustard relative flixweed has a smaller seed then all of them, but it is basically a weed of no edible use.
But I don’t think any of them are the “smallest” seeds from an edible plant; some of the spices, such as saffron, would probably be the smallest.
I’d just like to speak up for a moment on behalf of paragraphs.
When you write, you are inviting people into your thoughts. If your writing is knotted up in a long, jumbled stream, you force your guests to organize your thoughts for you. By trying to seem deep, you turn away those who might learn from you. You demand that they read your words more skillfully than you wrote them. It’s poor hospitality.
Paragraphs, used well, make it easier for everyone to hear what you’re saying. You’re not just helping those who “can’t figure out” more convoluted prose. By paragraphing well, you can get your point across to more of your smart readers, too–readers who might otherwise skim past because they don’t have time to work a puzzle.
I’m not really interested in the biblical aspects of this thread, but I’m reminded of the sermon on the mount, which (as I recall) starts with a lovely progression of clear, concise, compelling paragraphs. In fact it’s practically a bulleted list–the apotheosis of paragraphing–open, inclusive, and welcoming.
When you paragraph well, you say, “Here are my thoughts. I’ve arranged them neatly for you to share and enjoy. Come inside and mingle.”
Chips and dips are on the sideboard. Soda and ice are in the kitchen.
I have it here: Matthew 13:32 and Mark 4:31.
I’m not sure how much weight those guys carry as botanists, though.
Eh…it’s poetic hyperbole, not a botany lecture.
And lo, Jesus was snarky, and did not well conceal his contempt for his listeners, and things began to go rapidly downhill.