conuly | I recently found out that apparently

there are some Christians who think the Sermon on the Mount is optional until the Second Coming. Feed the hungry, clothe the naked, tend for the sick, visit the prisoner, or welcome the stranger*? NONE OF THAT NONSENSE HERE. Not until Jesus comes back.

The mind boggles. I can't even fathom how they twisted that logic to make it work.

I feel sorry for these people. No, really, I do**! They clearly missed that day in kindergarten where everybody learned how to share.

* Wait, is that Sermon on the Mount or something else? Anyway, thing is, it's optional.

** I don't.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

From:

kengr

Oh, you haven't heard the one where they say the bit about it being easier to get a camel through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to get to heaven?

They claim that refers to a very narrow gate in the wall of Jerusalem that was called "the eye of the needle".

So it's *possible* for a camel to get thru it, but it's really quite a chore.

*sigh*

And no, I'm not making this up.

From:

oloriel

I've heard that one, and I don't think it's actually that bad. I mean, if this is indeed the correct interpretation, it would mean that it isn't impossible for a rich man to go into heaven, but it would take a lot of conscious effort on his part. So a rich man who uses his money to (say) pay for the education of poor children or the hospital bills of those who can't afford them, who supports or installs charitable institutions, etc. - that kind of rich man can get to heaven. Just like the camel driver will probably have to coax the camel gently through the eye of the needle, while pushing, pulling or whipping the poor beast won't achieve anything.

Which is fair, in my opinion. I mean, having a lot of money shouldn't automatically disqualify someone. It's what they do with the money that makes the difference, right?

From:

kengr

That's thing thing. It doesn't *sound* that bad. But from what I hear, it's considered absolute BS by real Biblical scholars.

So we are left with what Christ (reportedly) said.

I'm in no danger of being excluded from heaven for *that* reason, but I've got enough others to worry about.

From:

oloriel

Good to know! I've heard it before, but never bothered to fact-check...

Well, we're always left with what Christ reportedly said, written down several decades later and then translated by various more or less talented hacks who all had their own bias and agenda. ^^

From:

conuly

Well, yes, but let's play along like we believe! Clap your hands!

Edited Date: 2018-06-18 05:39 pm (UTC)

From:

wpadmirer

Yeah, that's the point, but these new guys aren't interpreting it that way at all!

From:

conuly

It's BS. There's no evidence that there was ever such a gate. This interpretation, tellingly, was made up in the 1400s. If it had any validity, we would've heard about it sooner.

Another, somewhat more reasonable interpretation - and one which has been floating around for considerably longer than 500 years (try 1700 years!) - is that camel (kamêlos) and rope (kamilos) are very similar and that at some point somebody wrote the wrong word down and here we are. That is significantly more plausible than a gate that doesn't exist.

It's worth noting that, according to Wikipedia, the Talmud has multiple mentions of pushing an elephant through a needle, with the self-evident meaning. If the expression was simply in reasonably common parlance then it doesn't need to be explained or parsed literally, we can assume it means what it obviously means. Rich men aren't going into heaven.

This view is backed up by other things Jesus said about the rich. If you're rich, obviously one thing you've done with your money is hoarded it. That's a no-no. Storing up treasures on earth disqualifies you from going to heaven because only people who give away all their wealth and focus on a. charity and b. spiritual pursuits are getting in.

Edited Date: 2018-06-18 12:21 pm (UTC)

From:

oloriel

Thanks! I've heard it a few times but never bothered to fact-check (but then, I'm not particularly invested in either interpretation). The camel and rope explanation does sound a lot more plausible. (And would suggest, I suppose, that the rope can be got through if you unravel it and then pull every string through the eye of the needle separately... that is, give all your riches away? ;P)

From:

elf

"camel (kamêlos) and rope (kamilos) are very similar"

And rather more similar in the languages of the time, which didn't use vowels in the written form. Words like that were distinguished by context.

So, in context, which is more likely:
"This thing you want to do is like threading a needle with a rope," or
"This thing you want to do is like shoving a camel through a pinhole?"

It's amazing how many excuses have been made to try to make the second interpretation plausible, and then re-interpret it again to be something that only takes a bit of planning and skill to accomplish.

From:

conuly

As I gleaned from Wikipedia, the phrase "elephant through the eye of a needle" is used multiple times in Talmud, by multiple authors, to mean "something impossible". I'm willing to accept the possibility that the verbal image of pushing large animals through needles was simply a common expression in that rough time period, in which case it doesn't have to make sense.

I don't know that this is the case, but from my amateur perspective it's another option that's more plausible than convoluted stories that allow very large loopholes for rich people to get into heaven even though the obvious meaning is they can't. (And the idea that rich/powerful people wouldn't like that restriction and would be eager to spread alternative explanations is extremely plausible!)

Unless you're gonna tell me that elephant and rope also sound very similar in Greek, Aramaic, and or Hebrew. Which they might! I don't know!

From:

spikethemuffin

I kind of want the Nicene Council to have been fully aware of this, and signed off on it anyway.

"But Your Excellency---"

"No, no, no, Hosius, you are NOT taking that image from me. Or future generations. It's hilarious and surreal. Imagine the mimeographs of camels glued to Popsicle sticks stuck in thousands of chubby, pasty hands, clumsily bonking against needles..."

"Mimeo... graphs?"

"The gift of prophecy is a ridiculous burden, sometimes."

From:

conuly

LOL!

From:

the_siobhan

The most important part is that you have to completely unload everything the camel is carrying.

From:

konsectatrix

And maybe even give away the camel as well, and walk.

From:

conuly

That explanation is complete nonsense, and there's no evidence that there was ever any such gate.

From:

malkingrey

And if you were to believe those guys, no evidence that anyone, anywhere, ever spoke metaphorically about anything. Which is just one of the many many ways that Biblical literalism goes off the rails.

(I mean, when the founder of the movement himself is on record as making puns and telling shaggy-dog stories to make his points, literalism is not the place you should be going to for answers. Just sayin'.)