Needle ears. “Zhe”, or “eye of a needle, is the size of a camel. St. Kirill of Alexandria
Roman Makhankov, Vladimir Gurbolikov
In the Gospel there are words of Christ that confuse modern man: “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.” At first glance, this means only one thing - just as it is impossible for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, so a rich man cannot be a Christian, cannot have anything in common with God. However, is everything so simple?
Christ uttered this phrase not just as an abstract moral teaching. Let us remember what immediately preceded it. A rich Jewish youth approached Jesus and asked: “Teacher! What good thing can I do to have eternal life?” Christ answered: “You know the commandments: do not commit adultery, do not kill, do not steal, do not bear false witness, do not offend, honor your father and mother.” He lists here the ten commandments of the Law of Moses, on which the entire religious and civil life of the Jewish people was built. The young man could not help but know them. And indeed, he answers Jesus: “I have kept all this from my youth.” Then Christ says: “You lack one thing: go, sell everything you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come and follow Me.” The Gospel says about the young man’s reaction to these words: “Having heard this word, the young man went away sad, because he had great property.”
The upset young man leaves, and Christ tells the disciples those very words: “It is difficult for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of Heaven; and 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 heaven.”
This episode is easiest to interpret this way. First, a rich person cannot be a real Christian. And secondly, in order to be a truly true Christian - a follower of Christ - you must be poor, give up all your property, “sell everything and give it to the poor.” (By the way, this is exactly how these words of Jesus are read in many organizations that call themselves Christian, calling for a return to the purity of the Gospel ideals. Moreover, the very “poor” to whom the “rich” should “give everything away” are often the leaders of these religious organizations).
Before finding out why Christ makes such a categorical demand, let’s talk about the “camel and the eye of a needle.” Commentators of the New Testament have repeatedly suggested that the “eye of a needle” was a narrow gate in a stone wall through which a camel could pass with great difficulty. However, the existence of these gates is apparently speculation.
There is also an assumption that initially the text did not contain the word “kamelos”, camel, but a very similar word “kamilos”, rope (especially since in medieval pronunciation they coincided). If you take a very thin rope and a very large needle, maybe it will still work? But this explanation is also unlikely: when manuscripts are distorted, a more “difficult” reading is sometimes replaced with an “easier”, more understandable one, but not vice versa. So the original, apparently, was “camel”.
But still, we should not forget that the language of the Gospel is very metaphorical. And Christ, apparently, meant a real camel and a real eye of a needle. The fact is that the camel is the largest animal in the east. By the way, in the Babylonian Talmud there are similar words, but not about a camel, but about an elephant.
There is no generally accepted interpretation of this passage in modern biblical scholarship. But whatever interpretation one accepts, it is clear that Christ is here showing how difficult it is for a rich man to be saved. Of course, Orthodoxy is far from the extremes of the above sectarian reading of the Bible. However, in our Church there is a strong opinion that poor people are closer to God, more valuable in His eyes, than rich people. In the Gospel, a red thread runs through the idea of wealth as a serious obstacle to faith in Christ and to a person’s spiritual life. However, nowhere does the Bible say that by itself wealth serves as a reason to condemn a person, and poverty by her own capable of justifying it. The Bible in many places, in different interpretations, says: God does not look at a person’s face, not at a person’s social position, but at his heart. In other words, it doesn't matter how much money a person has. You can waste away - spiritually and physically - both over gold and over several mite coins.
It is not for nothing that Christ valued the widow’s two mites (and the “mite” was the smallest coin in Israel) more expensive than all the other, large and rich contributions placed in the church circle of the Jerusalem Temple. And, on the other hand, Christ accepted the huge monetary sacrifice of the repentant tax collector - Zacchaeus (Gospel of Luke, chapter 19, verses 1-10). It is not for nothing that King David, praying to God, said: “You do not want a sacrifice, I would give it; but You do not favor burnt offerings. A sacrifice to God is a contrite and humble heart” (Psalm 51:18-19).
Regarding poverty, the Apostle Paul's Epistle to the Corinthians has a clear answer to the question of the value of poverty in the eyes of God. The Apostle writes: “If I give away all my possessions, but do not have love, it does me no good” (). That is, poverty only has real value for God when it is based on love for God and neighbor. It turns out that it doesn’t matter to God how much a person puts in a donation mug. Another thing is important - what was this sacrifice for him? An empty formality – or something important that is painful to tear away from your heart? Words: “My son! Give me your heart” (Proverbs 23:26) - this is the criterion of true sacrifice to God.
But why then does the Gospel have a negative attitude towards wealth? Here, first of all, you need to remember that the Bible does not know a formal definition of the word “wealth” at all. The Bible does not specify the amount at which a person can be considered rich. The wealth that the Gospel condemns is not the amount of money, not the social or political position of a person, but his attitude to all these benefits. That is, who does he serve: God or the Golden Calf? Christ's words: “Where your treasure is, there your heart will be also” illustrates this condemnation.
When interpreting the Gospel episode with the rich young man, there is a risk of a literal, lecture-like understanding of what Christ said - said to this specific person. We must not forget that Christ is God, and therefore the Knower of the Heart. The eternal, enduring meaning of the Savior’s words in the case of the young man is not at all that a real Christian should give away all his property to the poor. A Christian can be poor, or maybe rich (by the standards of his time); he can work in both a church organization and a secular one. The point is that a person who wants to be a real Christian must give to God first of all my heart. Trust Him. And be calm about your financial situation.
Trusting God does not mean immediately going to the nearest train station and giving all the money to the homeless, leaving your children hungry. But having trusted in Christ, you must, in your place, strive to serve Him with all your wealth and talent. This applies to everyone, because everyone is rich in something: the love of others, talents, a good family, or the same money. This is very difficult, because you really want to set aside at least a part of these riches and hide them for yourself personally. But it is still possible for the “rich” to escape. The main thing is to remember that Christ Himself, when necessary, gave everything for us: His Divine Glory and omnipotence and Life itself. In the face of this Sacrifice, nothing is impossible for us.
The vast majority of mistakes in interpreting Scripture are made not because a person does not know Greek or does not understand the principles of hermeneutics, but simply because of simple carelessness. Sometimes, a small word with only two letters can make a huge difference. Here, for example, is a word like “zhe”. Just an intensifying particle (that’s what this little word is called in Russian). It shows the relationship with the previous text and helps to understand it correctly. But it can diametrically change our understanding of what we read. Of course, it's not about the particle itself, but about the context it prompts us to explore, it's about the questions it can lead us to. It is like a hook with which you can hook a weighty fish. What a big and noticeable role such a small and inconspicuous word as “zhe” can play, says Vladislav Nasonov.
There is a very common misinterpretation regarding the “eye of a needle” and to understand this you only need to look at the context. I want to give some clarification on this issue and offer one interesting exegetical observation on the text of the 19th chapter of Matthew. We will consider questions about a rich young man who wants to enter eternal life, the eye of a needle and camels, and about those who can still be saved.
Let's go through the whole story again. A rich young man approaches the Messiah and says to Him: “What good thing must I do to inherit eternal life?”(Matthew 19:16) I think this phrase is very important. The question of all Synoptic evangelists is formulated in a similar way - "what should I do" at Mark's "what should I do" in Luke. As Donald Carson notes, the young man did not see the connection between Jesus and eternal life. Apparently he believed that eternal life is achieved through fulfilling the commandments of the Law. In other words, he believed in salvation by works.
Andrey Mironov. “If you want to be perfect” (fragment)
Christ answers him that he must keep the commandments. To which the young man replies that he kept all the commandments from his youth. In this case, it doesn’t matter whether this is true or whether he exaggerated his abilities. Personally, I doubt that he fully fulfilled all of the above commandments. Another thing is important - Christ offers him the way of salvation - go, sell all your possessions and follow Me. Obviously, in this case, the command to sell the property was given directly to a given person in a given situation, and God had a specific purpose. We clearly understand from the text of the gospel that salvation does not require the complete sale of all one’s property, then what was the Lord’s goal in this case?
Quite often I heard sermons condemning the rich young man, saying that he was so and so gone with a seal, was it difficult to do what Jesus commanded him? But let’s think about it: if in order to be saved we were all required to sell everything we have - houses, cars, property... and remain in the same clothes on the street... would there be many people being saved? If the obligatory condition for baptism was the condition that Christ set for the rich young man, how many were baptized? We can safely say that the condition is extremely difficult, and only God can demand this. But before we talk about the purposes that the Lord pursued, let us turn to subsequent actions. The young man walked away sadly and Christ said to His disciples: “Truly I say to you, it is difficult for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven; “I also 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 the Most High.”. And here comes the fun part.
Heinrich Hoffman. Christ and the Rich Young Man, 1889 (fragment)
Nowadays, in Christian (and not only) circles there is a widespread opinion that the richer a person is, the more difficult it is for him to achieve salvation. This opinion is based on the fact that the rich have many temptations, he has to give up a lot, and so on. And it’s easier for the poor. Let us remember the words of Agur: “Give me not poverty and riches, feed me with daily bread, lest I be full and deny You and say, “Who is the Lord?” and lest, being poor, I begin to steal and take the name of my God in vain.” (Proverbs 30:8-9) In general, since Old Testament times, people have understood that it is difficult for a rich person to go to God. So, in our understanding, it is difficult for the rich, but it is easier for the poor to enter the kingdom of God. But did the disciples think so?
And here the particle “zhe” will help us: “When His disciples heard this, they were greatly amazed and said, “Who then can be saved?”(Matthew 19:25). This “same” is in all the Gospels, where this story is described. Notice that the disciples were amazed. Matthew uses a word derived from εκπλασσω , which means to be beside oneself with surprise, to be amazed, to be amazed. That is, they were very, very surprised by what was said and answered “So who can be saved?”. The word used as “same” is άρα , which is more accurately translated as "Then". We often connect “then” and “then” and say: “If not him, then who then?”. For example, the world jumping champion was unable to achieve a certain height and we say: “if Javier Sotomayor did not achieve this height, then who can achieve it?” That is, it is assumed that the one about whom it is said can do it better than others. That is, the meaning of the phrase that the disciples said to Christ is this: “If it is difficult for the rich to be saved, how can anyone be saved?”
So, the disciples assumed that it was easier for a rich young man to enter the kingdom of heaven than other people. Two important conclusions can be drawn here:
First: if we assume that such gates as the “eyes of a needle” were in Jerusalem, then the extreme degree of surprise of the disciples is absolutely inconsistent. After all, according to history, a camel could pass through these gates by kneeling. That is, this is not an impossible action. Judging by the degree of amazement of the students, one can only conclude that such a gate had never existed. Moreover, this fact is confirmed by historical evidence. Egor Rozenkov writes about this in particular. Gordon de Fee and Douglas Stewart talk about this in their book How to Read the Bible and See Its Value. Craig Kinnear also notes that the gate theory does not hold water.
There is another interesting fact that hammers a nail into the coffin of this theory: Gordon de Fee points out that this interpretation was first found in the 11th century and it belongs to the monk Toefelactu. Apparently the monk could not relate the rich donations, temples and lands belonging to the clergy with this simple and unambiguous comparison, so he came up with an interpretation.
Also, all the main comments that I use indicate the inconsistency of this theory about the gate. In particular, Mac Arthur and MacDonald talk about this, and Matthew Henry and Biblical Interpretations of Dallas Theological Seminary do not even consider it necessary to prove anything regarding this theory about the gate. Carson omits this point altogether. Only Barkley mentions the gate in a positive context, and then his argument is limited only to the word “they say that there was such a gate.” It’s not worth talking about the level of this argumentation. The reference books I use also list the gate theory as an alternative or possible theory, without providing any historical evidence.
Those same modern “eyes of a needle” that are shown to tourists
There is only one thing that confuses: those who have been to Jerusalem have seen these gates with their own eyes. At least that's what the guide told them. It is useless to discuss with such people, because they have a powerful basis for their belief in the miraculous gate: this is their own impression (seen with their own eyes), and the words of the guide, which they trust more than serious researchers and the context of Scripture. However, I will say that since the time of Christ, Jerusalem has repeatedly passed from hand to hand of different rulers and empires; it was either destroyed, starting with the famous siege of Titus in 70, or rebuilt. And the modern wall surrounding Jerusalem was built under Sultan Suleiman the Magnificent in the Middle Ages. So, if there is a gate in the Jerusalem wall today, it was built on the basis of an incorrect interpretation of Theofelakt. And it is not surprising that for tourists in Jerusalem some loopholes were called the eyes of a needle. After all, what a shame it would be to come to Jerusalem and not find the famous gates there, but it’s a pleasure for tourists - photographs, impressions. In short, the first conclusion from this text is that such a gate never existed in Jerusalem. And I mean the usual eye of a needle.
Regarding whether a rope is meant instead of a camel, I will say that I don’t think so. Because, firstly, this is mentioned in three Gospels, and the variant of such distortion in three Gospels at once tends to zero. And secondly, a similar phrase is found in ancient literature, at least in the Talmud and the Koran. Although in this case the camel or the rope are all one, you can’t push a needle into the eye. So, Christ said to the disciples: It is impossible for a rich man to be saved! As MacDonald writes, “The Lord spoke not of difficulty, but of impossibility. To put it simply, a rich man simply cannot escape.”
Boris Olshansky. Expulsion of traders from the temple
Second The important conclusion from this story is that, unlike us, Christ’s disciples had no idea that it was difficult for a rich man to be saved. Vice versa! They believed that it was easier for the rich to inherit eternal life. I think there are two reasons for this: firstly, wealth for Christ’s contemporaries meant the favor and favor of God (as for some today). Although, it is obvious that the Old Testament does not confirm this in any way. And secondly, a rich person can put more into the treasury and do more good deeds. Accordingly, one has a greater chance of eternal life if one understands that a ticket to the Kingdom of God is bought by deeds.
Let us remember what the rich young man’s idea was: “What good can I do?” The young man understood that eternal life could be earned through virtue. Christ showed the true highest standard of virtue - sell everything and give to the poor. The plank is almost impossible for this young man, who should have turned his gaze to Christ. I think the Lord had precisely this goal - to destroy this false idea of salvation by works. Having commanded to sell everything, He conveyed a simple thought to the young man’s consciousness on an emotional level - you will never be saved by your own works, you will never be able to save yourself without Me. Never. Later, He again points out this truth to the disciples - it is impossible to be saved by works, only through faith and following Jesus (God can save you).
By the way, pay attention to your feelings when you read this story - do you feel surprise and horror? How do you perceive yourself - is it easier for you than a young man to enter the Kingdom of God or more difficult? The fact is that emotionally we do not consider ourselves among the rich and automatically understand that it is they, the rich, who need to leave their luggage and get on their knees, crawling into the sky, and then we will fly there. And if the apostles, hearing this comparison, perceived themselves as an elephant, then we feel like, at most, a thread that can easily pass through the eye of a needle.
Find more like this:The history of this place began more than two thousand years ago. At that time, this was the outskirts of the ancient city, and one of the corner watchtowers with the city gate was located. King Herod built these walls. And today you can see here ancient stonework with characteristic Herodian trimming along the edges of the stones.
For 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.
The Alexander Metochion was built on a site acquired by the Russian Empire, which was located in close proximity to. Initially, it was planned to build a consulate on this site, but when clearing the area, the remains of ancient structures were discovered.
Directly systemic excavations were started by the Imperial Orthodox Palestine Society in 1882. Its chairman, Grand Duke Sergei Alexandrovich, acted as a patron of the arts. Supervision and leadership in this matter was entrusted to Archimandrite Antonin (Kapustin), who headed the Russian Spiritual Mission in Jerusalem from 1865 to 1894. The excavations were directly carried out by the German architect and archaeologist, a brilliant expert on Jerusalem antiquities, Konrad Schick.
During the excavations, the remains of the city's outer and inner walls, an arch with two columns, and the remains of a church built by the Holy Queen Helen in the 4th century were found. Konrad Schick determined the shape of the gate in the wall. This immediately entered the system of Christian shrines as the “threshold of the Gate of Judgment”, through which Jesus Christ left the city, following to Golgotha.
It became clear that in such a place, valuable for the entire Christian world, as well as the only place of the Way of the Cross belonging to the Russian Orthodox Church, the construction of a Russian consulate was inappropriate. It was decided to build a temple here. But a number of problems arose, since the construction of the church in the courtyard required the consent of the Jerusalem Patriarchate, the Catholic clergy and the Turkish government. The head of the Ottoman Empire prohibited any construction in the territories under his control, Catholics stood guard over their interests, and the Jerusalem Church officially declared its protest, fearing that the Russian Church would be located next to the main shrine of Christianity - the Church of the Resurrection of Christ. One of the conditions of the Patriarch of Jerusalem regarding the ownership of the church was a categorical statement that the church should belong to the royal family, and not to the Palestine Society, in whose house it would be located.
Thanks to the diplomatic abilities of Archimandrite Antonin Kapustin and the entire Russian diplomatic mission in the East, the agreement was signed, and the church in the courtyard with a shelter for pilgrims with a total area of 1433 square meters was consecrated on May 22, 1896 in honor of the Holy Blessed Prince Alexander Nevsky.
The temple in the name of Prince Alexander Nevsky is the largest room of the courtyard. It is decorated with a wooden carved two-tier iconostasis, dating back to Byzantine times. The height of the liturgical hall is 10 meters, length 22 meters. In the center of the church hall in front of the iconostasis there is a stone throne, which scientists and archaeologists attribute to the side church of the basilica of King Constantine, built by him in the 4th century. At the end of the western wall hang 14 painted icons in black frames on stretchers, revealing to believers the holy faces of the ascetics of the faith of Christ.
On the eastern side of the temple there is a triple stained glass window depicting the Crucifixion with the Mother of God and St. John the Evangelist standing.
The premises of the large two-story Alexander Metochion were intended for a temple, pilgrims' rooms, reception halls, a library and a museum with a rich and interesting exhibition.
On the first floor of the Compound, immediately at the entrance, there is a Reception Room or, as they call it, the “Royal Room”. It should be clarified that neither Emperor Alexander III nor Nicholas II have ever been here. Perhaps the name came from the interior of this hall and the royal portraits.
An ancient wooden staircase leads to the second floor of the Alexander Compound, opening onto a corridor and connecting rooms for clergy, a library and an archive.
In the basement of the Compound, two corridors unite three small rooms that were previously intended for the residence of employees and a cistern containing 15,760 buckets of water.
11. On the longitudinal side walls of the Alexander Nevsky Temple there are 18 picturesque images (3 meters high and 2 meters wide) by N. A. Koshelev, a professor at the St. Petersburg Academy of Arts, a member of the Imperial Orthodox Palestine Society.
– Christ in the Garden of Gethsemane (1890s)
– Prayer for the Cup (1891)
– The Kiss of Judas (1890)
– Leading Jesus Christ to Judgment (1892)
– Denial of the Apostle Peter (1892)
– The Accusation of Christ (1894)
– Jesus Christ being led to Pilate (1893)
– Pilate washes his hands (1895)
– Jesus Christ interrogated by Pontius Pilate (1895)
– Simon carries the Cross of the Savior (1900)
– Weep not, daughters of Jerusalem (1899)
– Before the Crucifixion (Jesus' Procession to Golgotha) (1900)
– Crucifixion (Puncture of Jesus' rib by a warrior) (1900s)
– Descent from the Cross (1897)
– Preparation for the burial of Jesus Christ (1894)
– Theotokos at the Holy Sepulcher (Position in the Sepulchre) (1894)
– Myrrh-Bearing Women at the Holy Sepulcher (Resurrection of Christ) (1896)
– Descent into Hell (1900)
12. Along the northern and southern walls of the temple there are 16 images of ascetics, righteous people and confessors. The images of the saints are executed in a strict, full-length pictorial manner, in strict black monastic robes, with halos on a golden background. These are the holy Forerunner and Baptist of the Lord John, Andrew the First-Called, St. George the Victorious and St. Chariton the Confessor, John of Damascus and Porphyry, Archbishop of Gaza, Great Barsanuphius and Archbishop Cyril of Alevsky, St. John the Chozebitus and Theoctistus the Faster, Gerasimos of Jordan and Hilarion the Great, Theodosius the Great and Savva. Consecrated, Euthymius the Great and Great Equal-to-the-Apostles Emperor Constantine and his mother Saint Helen Equal-to-the-Apostles.
Everyone, of course, knows the amazing words of Christ in the final part of the episode with the rich young man:
“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.”(Matthew 19:24).
The meaning of the saying is obvious: a rich person, unless he leaves his wealth, cannot enter the Kingdom of Heaven.
And the further narration confirms this:
“When His disciples heard this, they were greatly amazed and said, “Who then can be saved?” And Jesus looked up and said to them, “With men this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.”(Matthew 19:25-26).
The Holy Fathers understood “eyes of a needle” literally. Here, for example, is what St. writes. John Chrysostom: “Having said here that it is inconvenient for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven, he further shows that it is impossible, not just impossible, but also extremely impossible, which he explains by the example of a camel and the eye of a needle.”/VII:.646/. If the rich were saved (Abraham, Job), it was only thanks to the deep grace personally given by the Lord.
However, some, due to their weakness, thirst for wealth, do not like this conclusion at all. And that’s why they persistently try to challenge it.
And in modern times, an opinion has emerged: “the eye of a needle” is a narrow and inconvenient passage in the Jerusalem wall. “That’s how it turns out! - the people were delighted, - otherwise they were filled with fear: will a camel ever crawl through the eye of a needle? But now the rich can still inherit the Kingdom of Heaven!”
However, the situation with these gates is extremely ambiguous. On the one hand, “eyes of a needle” are a reality. They are located on a fragment of the Jerusalem Wall discovered by archaeologists, which is now part of the architectural complex of the Alexander Metochion in Jerusalem. This beautiful building was built by Archimandrite. Antonin (Kapustin) at the end of the 19th century. and now belongs to the ROCOR. So even now pilgrims can calmly go there and climb into a narrow passage, accessible only for a non-fat person, which they say are the same “eyes of a needle” - they say, the main gates were closed at night, but travelers could enter the city through this hole.
The German archaeologist Konrad Schick, who carried out the excavations, dated this fragment of the wall to the 3rd-4th centuries. BC But the trouble is that such a gate is not mentioned in any ancient source, all the early commentators of the Gospel do not know about such an interpretation, and the Evangelist Luke, citing this saying (Luke 18:25), generally uses the term “belone”, meaning a surgical needle ... So this is just a hypothesis, and a very shaky one. But it is very desirable, so that now you can read about this gate in the Jerusalem wall in any book that touches on the property teaching of the Church.
However, the joy of lovers of combining God and mammon turns out to be premature. Even if the Savior meant “eyes of the needle” precisely in the sense of gates, they turned out to be so narrow that in order for a camel to pass through them, it must be unloaded, freed from all the loads on its back, in other words, “distribute everything to the poor.” But in this case, the rich man, loaded like a camel with his wealth, turns into a poor man, free from wealth, and therefore having the courage to ascend to the mountains. In other words, there is still only one way for salvation: “Sell everything you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven, and come, follow Me.”(Luke 18:22).
However, many more attempts were made to weaken the Lord’s statement. Inventive theologians, leaving the “eyes of the needle” alone (by the way, there is no plural in the Greek text), turned to “camel” and, replacing one letter, decided that it was a rope (“camel” and “rope” - kamelos and kamilos) . Moreover, the Aramaic word “gamla” means both “camel” and “rope”. And then they made a “rope” out of the rope, or even a “thread of camel’s hair.”
But even in the latter case, it was not possible to change the meaning of the Savior’s statement - the camel turned out to have such coarse wool that a thread made from it rather resembles a rope and will not fit into any eye of a needle.
Isn’t it better to leave alone this amazing hyperbole, which so amazes the imagination that it is immediately remembered for a lifetime.
Nikolay Somin
St. John Chrysostom
St. Kirill of Alexandria
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 the kingdom of God.
St. Hilary of Pictavia
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 the kingdom of God.
St. Maxim the Confessor
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 the kingdom of God.
What do the words mean: It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of Heaven.
Simpler, says Jesus, to the twisted [nature] of the pagans - after all, this is what it is camel- pass the narrow [gate] and narrow [path](Matthew 7:14), which means eyelet, into the Kingdom of Heaven, rather than to the Jewish people, who had the Law and the Prophets. Just as a needle passes through two pieces of fabric and makes one of them, so our Lord Jesus Christ, who is a needle, united two peoples, according to the Apostle, making both one(Eph. 2:14) . However, [according to another interpretation], whoever through abstinence has exhausted and twisted himself [like a thread], it is easier for him to pass through the narrow gates into the Kingdom of Heaven than for a rich man who constantly fattens himself with food and human glory.
Questions and difficulties.
St. Justin (Popovich)
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 the kingdom of God.
Right John of Kronstadt
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 the kingdom of God.
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., that is, it is extremely difficult for the rich to leave their whims, their luxury, their hardness of heart, their stinginess, their earthly pleasures and begin a life according to the Gospel, a life always abstinent, full of good fruits: mercy, meekness, humility, gentleness - pure and chaste. Life in repentance and incessant tears. Is it not amusements, luxury, games, or commercial transactions that occupy them all their lives? And their constant pride, like a necklace, surrounds them, and their inaccessibility to the poor, and their contempt is exorbitant?! Just think that these are the same mortals who were created from dust and will return to dust!
Diary. Volume XIX. December 1874.
Blzh. Hieronymus of Stridonsky
Art. 24-26 And I also tell you: it’s more comfortable for a camel(camelum) to pass through the eye of a needle, rather than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God. Hearing this, His disciples were greatly amazed and said: So who can be saved? And Jesus looked up and said to them, “With men this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.”
These words already show that it is not [only] difficult, but also impossible [for a rich person to enter the Kingdom of Heaven]. Indeed, if a camel cannot pass through the eye of a needle, and if likewise a rich man cannot enter the Kingdom of Heaven; then none of the rich will be saved. However, if we read in Isaiah about how the camels of Midian and Ephah will arrive in Jerusalem with gifts and treasures (Is. 60:6), and also that those who were originally bent and twisted by the ugliness of vices enter the gates of Jerusalem, then we We will see that these camels, with which the rich are compared, after they have laid aside the burden of sins and are freed from all the ugliness of the body, can enter the narrow gate and enter the narrow path leading to life (Matthew 7). And when the students ask a question and are surprised at the severity of what was said [saying]: Who will be saved in this way? He mercifully mitigates the severity of His sentence, saying: What is impossible with people is possible with God.
Blzh. Theophylact of Bulgaria
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 the kingdom of God.
Evfimy Zigaben
Again I say to you: it is more convenient to eat, I will let you pass through the ears of a needle, before you can bring a rich man into the Kingdom of God.
Having said that this matter is difficult, he calls it impossible, and even more than impossible. It is impossible for a camel, an animal, to pass through the eye of a needle, or even more impossible than that. Of course, the speech is somewhat exaggerated in order to arouse fear in the covetous. Some here mean a camel as a thick rope used by shipbuilders. With these words, Christ condemns not wealth, but addiction to it. Great example! Just as the eye of a needle cannot accommodate a camel because of its crampedness and its fullness and pomp, so the path leading to life cannot accommodate wealth because of its crampedness and its arrogance. Therefore, one must put aside all pride, as the Apostle teaches (Heb. 12:1), and humble oneself through voluntary poverty.
Interpretation of the Gospel of Matthew.
Lopukhin A.P.
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 the kingdom of God.
(Mark 10:24-25; Luke 18:25). According to Mark, the Savior first repeated the saying He had said about the difficulty for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of Heaven, regarding the fact that the disciples “were horrified at His words,” and only after that added the teaching common to all the weather forecasters. Here it is obvious Christ only explains Your previous saying with the help of an example. All weather forecasters mention χαμηλός - camel. But in some manuscripts it reads χάμιλος, which is explained as παχύ σχοίλον - a thick ship rope. Discrepancies in the transmission of the further expression “through the ears of a needle” (in Matthew δια τροπήματος ραφίδος; in Mark δια τρνπήματος τής ραφίδος; in Luke δι α τροπήματος βελόνης; all these expressions have the same meaning) in any case show that the difficulty of the Savior’s speech was felt in ancient times . There has been much debate about the meaning of these expressions. Lightfoot and others have shown that this was a proverb found in the Talmud to indicate some kind of difficulty. Only the Talmud speaks not of a camel, but of an elephant. Thus, in one place it is said about dreams that during them we cannot see what we have not seen before, for example, a golden palm tree or an elephant passing through the eye of a needle. One man, who had done what seemed absurd or even incredible, was told: “You must be one of the Pobedites (a Jewish school in Babylon), who can make an elephant pass through the eye of a needle.” Similar expressions are found in the Koran, but with the elephant replaced by a camel; and even in India there are proverbs: “an elephant passing through a small door” or “through the eye of a needle.” In this sense, many of the newest interpreters understand the saying of the Savior. The opinion that the “eye of a needle” should be understood as a narrow and low gate through which camels cannot pass is now considered generally erroneous. Even less likely is the opinion, which appeared already in antiquity, that by camel here we should mean a rope. The change from χαμηλός to χάμιλος is arbitrary. Κάμιλος is a word so rare that in Greek it can even be considered non-existent; it is not found in good Greek dictionaries, although it must be said that the metaphor of a rope, which is difficult to pull through the eye of a needle, could be somewhat more natural than about a camel which cannot pass through the eye of a needle. (Apparently, the ancient interpretation of the eye of a needle as a gate that is made in a fortress wall for the entrance of night caravans has a completely real basis. Until now in the East, in order for a camel to enter a caravanserai for the night, it is put on its knees, part of it is removed luggage and he goes through the door on his knees. Humble yourself, throw it away excessive care for earthly things - and you will enter the Kingdom of Heaven. Note ed.)
But whatever interpretation we accept, the main difficulty lies not in this, but in the purpose for which such a strange metaphor is used here. Did Christ want to point out here the complete impossibility for the rich to enter the Kingdom of Heaven? Did He mean to say that just as it is impossible for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle, so it is impossible for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of God? But Abraham was very rich in cattle, silver and gold (Gen. 13:2) and yet this, according to the Savior Himself, did not prevent him from being in the Kingdom of God (Luke 13:28; cf. 16:22, 23, 26 ; John 8:56 etc.). It is difficult, further, to assume that the Savior’s speech applied only to this to the rich man who had just left Him; πλούσιον would then be placed with a member, which all three evangelists do not have. If, finally, we take the words of the Savior in their literal meaning, then we will need to admit that they should serve (and, it seems, serve) as a stronghold for all kinds of socialist teachings and the proletariat. Anyone who owns any property and has not enrolled in the ranks of the proletarians cannot enter the Kingdom of Heaven. In the comments, we generally do not find the answer to these questions; they should be considered to this day unresolved, and the words of Christ are not clear enough. Perhaps this expresses the general New Testament view of wealth, which serves as an obstacle to serving God (cf. Matt. 6:24; Luke 16:13). (What are these newer interpretations? Ed.) But it seems that the most likely explanation is as follows. The New Testament places service to God and Christ in the foreground; the result of this may be the use of external goods (Matthew 6:33). But for a rich man who puts service to mammon in the foreground and only in the last place - following Christ and serving Him, or even does not do this latter at all, it is indeed always difficult to become an heir to the Kingdom of Heaven.
Explanatory Bible.
