https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eye_of_a_needle
Judaism
The Babylonian Talmud applies the aphorism to unthinkable thoughts. To explain that dreams reveal the thoughts of a man's heart, the product of reason rather than the absence of it, some rabbis say:
They do not show a man a palm tree of gold, nor an elephant going through the eye of a needle.[1]
A Midrash on the Song of Songs uses the phrase to speak of God's willingness and ability beyond comparison, to accomplish the salvation of a sinner:
The Holy One said, open for me a door as big as a needle's eye and I will open for you a door through which may enter tents and [camels?].[2]
Rav Sheishet of Nehardea applies the same aphorism to the convoluted reasoning for which the sages of Pumbedita were evidently famous: "Are you from Pumbedita, where they push an elephant through the eye of a needle?" (Baba Metzia, 38b).
Christianity
"The eye of a needle" is scripture quoting Jesus recorded in the synoptic gospels:
I tell you the truth, it is hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven. Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God. When the disciples heard this, they were greatly astonished and asked, “Who then can be saved?” Jesus looked at them and said, “With man this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.” Matthew 19:23-26
Parallel versions appear in Mark 10:24-27, and Luke 18:24-27.
The saying was a response to a young rich man who had asked Jesus what he needed to do in order to inherit eternal life. Jesus replied that he should keep the commandments, to which the man stated he had done. Jesus responded, "If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me." The young man became sad and was unwilling to do this. Jesus then spoke this response, leaving his disciples astonished.
Cyril of Alexandria claimed that "camel" is a Greek misprint; that kamêlos (camel) was a misprint of kamilos, meaning "rope" or "cable".[2][3]
Gate
The "Eye of the Needle" has been claimed to be a gate in Jerusalem, which opened after the main gate was closed at night. A camel could only pass through this smaller gate if it was stooped and had its baggage removed. This story has been put forth since at least the 15th century, and possibly as far back as the 9th century. However, there is no widely accepted evidence for the existence of such a gate.[4][5] There is actually a small gate in Jerusalem called "eye of a needle". It can be found in the Russian Church, in the Old City of Jerusalem, but was built in the 16th century, and clearly has nothing to do with this passage.
Variations on this story include that of ancient inns having small entrances to thwart thieves, or a story of an old mountain pass known as the "eye of the needle", so narrow that merchants would have to dismount from their camels and were thus more vulnerable to waiting brigands. There is no historical evidence for any of these, either. This also ignores the explanation given in Matthew 19:26 :“With man this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.”
https://www.facebook.com/notes/hadrian-mar-elijah-bar-israel/the-use-of-the-aramaic-gamela-in-mark-1025/671650642924800
It is easier for a rope to enter through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God. - Mark 10:25 KJV
Whereas ܓܐܡܠܥalways means “halter” and ܓܐܡܠܐ means either “Camel” or “Beam”.
Oddly, when the Greek biblical redactors began translating the original Aramaic texts into the Kioné, they misunderstood the meaning of the Aramaic "ܓܐܡܠܥ" (‘GaMLA’), which refers to a halter, which according to the American Heritage Dictionary, “a rope or strap with a noose or headstall for leading or restraining horses or cattle.”; and instead translated the meaning of the word ܓܐܡܠܐ thus replacing the logical “halter” with an illogical and absurd camel (i.e. the handsome desert animal). In the time of Christ, however, the halter would be wound through a large iron eye to "hitch" the animal to which it was attached. Thus, the idea of a halter passing through the eye of a needle would be familiar to the action of threading the halter through the hitching post. Thus, in the Gospel, where the word ܓܐܡܠܥ is used, the statement makes logical sense, and brings to mind the familiar gesture of both hitching an animal and threading a needle.
You can see this rather silly error of the Greek perpetuated in the English of the NIV versions of both Mark and Matthew:
Mark 10:24-25 NIV
The disciples were amazed at his words. But Jesus said again, “Children, how hard it is to enter the kingdom of God! It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.”
Matthew 19:23-25 NIV
Then said Jesus to his disciples, “Truly I say to you, that a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven. And again I say to you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.”
From the Greek perspective then, Jesus was creating a logical absurdity - since under no circumstances can you ever get a camel (or even all of the blood and hair of a mechanically decimated camel) through the eye of a needle – the implication being that it is impossible for a rich man to get into heaven. This is yet another instance of the Deceiver working through the Greek to distort and dispel the real message and power of Jesus.
Hope however comes from the original Aramaic text. For the rope of a halter can always be disentwined slowly and painstakingly, into smaller and smaller cords, until each piece really could be strung through the eye of a needle. We really can choose to undo what binds us, disentwine what parts of this word have been twisted together around us and hold us back from our desire to follow God.
And even though the Greek words καμήλα (camel) and καλώδιο (a rope) and the Aramaic word ܓܡܠܐ, are all derived from the Hebrew גמל, Aramaic has only one split word to mean beam and camel, whereas the Greek has two separate words with separate spellings, and thus it is much more likely that the problem originated with the initial Aramaic split word, than with a mispronunciation of the Greek as some Greek Primacists claim, and is not at all unlikely that the similar Aramaic word meaning halter could have been misspelled in multiple copying. Especially if the scribe were accustomed to reading a line, then turning and writing it. The soundex would would be easy to plug in.
Dr. George Lamsa, in his translation of the Peshitta, changes ܓܐܡܠܐ to mean “rope” rather than its meaning of “camel” or “beam”. He had two reasons for doing this, both of which are wrong. First, he was acting on the supposition that it made more sense for a rope, something akin to a giant piece of thread, to pass through a needle, than a “halter” would. Secondly, he asserts that the rope was made of camel hair, and for this reason, in this instance, it means rope. That would be ‘translation’ according to what the translator believes makes the most sense, rather than what the words actually say. The most likely scenario is that in the multiple copying of the text, at some point, an ayin was changed to an alap based upon the sound of the word in the West Syriac dialect, which effectively changed the meaning of the word from “halter”, to “camel”, thus perpetuating the Greek’s mistake.
The Armenian Church, which was founded in the third Century by Aramaic speaking Christians from the region of Palestine has consistently translated this as մալուխ (‘malukh’), which means “cable” (Edmond, page 32), and not ‘camel’.
Saint Cyril of Alexandria speaking only in regard to the Greek text, claimed that the use of "camel" was a kamêlos (camel) was a misprint of kamilos, meaning "rope" or "cable".[2][5] all early manuscripts and quotations in the western church fathers from the 3rd through to the 8th centuries have 'camel' not 'rope'.
But there is more, much more, and a more precise reading. As it turns out, in Hebrew גמל (‘gamel’) can mean “bounty” or “possessions”. This is because the book most used and looked to for the Jewish liturgy of the time, Tehillim (Psalms), there are several passages that use this word, or a variation thereof, and would have been quite familiar in a liturgical (and thus deeper and more heartfelt) sense. Psalm 13:6, Psalm 116:7, Psalm 119:17 all use the word to refer to bounty, reward and possessions. For instance: לָמָּה יִגְמְלֵנִי הַגְּמוּלָה הַזּאֹת - ‘Lama yigama yigmaleni hagamula hazot?’, which translates as “Why have you rewarded me with this bounty?” There are also similar references in Samuel and the prophets.
Taking this into consideration, Jesus’ actual intention was likely to have been: “It is harder for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven than for all his possessions to pass through the eye of a needle." Which gives much more meaning to Peter's response to Him, “We have left all we had to follow you!” (Luke 18:28*)
Thus indicating that he and the apostles had no “bounty” remaining to pass through the eye of a needle. In this context, Peters response is not quite so baffling and out of place, and teaches us what we must do now if we are to claim a calling as Christ’s children.
The many Greek errors on which the “church fathers” relied for their philosophy leave much to be desired and only confusion can come from them.
Some in an attempt to explain this passage, actually claimed that the “Eye of the Needle” was one of the gates which led into the city of Jerusalem.
The gates are clearly mentioned by name in Nechemyah and Shmuel, as well as being outlined by Josephus, and discussed at length in the Talmud.
The number of gates has changed through the centuries, but at no point was one referred to as "eye of the needle".
Cheese/Dung Gate (Shepoth/Ashpoth)
the Fountain Gate
the Valley Gate
the Corner Gate
the Gate of Benyamin/Ephrayim
the Prison/Archers Gate
the Sheep Gate
the Old/Middle/Upper Gate,
the Fish Gate
the Horse Gate.
At later times after the destruction, there were four:
the Gate of Abraham,
the Gate of David
the Gate of Zion
the Gate of Jehoshaphat
In modern times, there are eight:
the Zion Gate
the Dung Gate
the Gate of Mercy
the Lion's Gate
Herod's Gate
the Damascus Gate
the New gate
the Gate of Jaffa
From the Matthew Henry commentary (A Protestant, mind you): "From taking a too literal view of the passage, some commentators have invented a gate at Jerusalem, low and narrow, designed only for foot passengers, which was called "the needle's eye.""
His commentary is not the only to chide those that "invent" gates to make sense of the Gospel.
As for the Protestant "gates" interpretation, the Greek camel and Lamsa's bizzare "rope trick", I can only say that these are just a repetition of the same redacted statements of the Messiah that the Greeks have been repeating since they translated their scriptures from the original Aramaic texts back in the early third century A.D. - Error after error, compounded into a new theology that with the fall of the Nazarani churches a thousand years later, became the dominant philosophy of the western world. It's time however for us to return to the true faith as taught by Jesus and His Apostles in their original language.
