Is the 'eye of the needle' a gate in Jerusalem?

The evidence

Evidence

Each claim judged on its own, with the limits of the evidence stated.

No outside evidence · silence partly expected
A Jerusalem gate called the needle's eye existed in Jesus' time
Ziemińska finds no ancient evidence of the phrase as the name of a Jerusalem gate in Jesus' time or earlier; the earliest mention she identifies seems to be the medieval gloss attributed to Anselm, and she allows a lost earlier source.
Why this verdict
Claims others made
Confidence: high
Ziemińska finds no ancient evidence of the phrase as the name of a Jerusalem gate in Jesus' time or earlier; the earliest mention she identifies seems to be the medieval gloss attributed to Anselm, and she allows a lost earlier source. JosephusJosephusA Jewish historian (37–after 100 CE), according to Steve Mason and the Jewish Encyclopedia. Mason explains that his Antiquities, completed in 93/94 CE, retells Judean history from creation to the eve of the war against Rome.From: Mason; Mason; Gottheil; Mason; MasonAll terms → names some Jerusalem gates without this one, but does not list every small entrance, so his silence is only partly informative. Absence in the sources checked does not prove that no such gate ever existed.^{4 sources}4 sources7. Ziemińska 2022 10. Ziemińska 2022 11. Broadus 1886 12. Whiston
Cross-community agreement · Writers from different communities find no support for an ancient gate: Ziemińska (critical), Broadus (a Baptist commentator, 1886), Piper (Reformed), MacArthur as Buettel quotes him (evangelical) and Insight on the Scriptures (Jehovah's Witnesses). Ziemińska writes that most biblical scholars now think the theory incorrect; that is her characterisation, not a survey. (as of 2026-11-09)
What would change this verdict: An independently dated ancient source naming a Jerusalem gate the needle's eye.
Supported
The Greek text of the saying has camel (κάμηλον), not the rope word (κάμιλον)
All eight Greek editions STEPBible compares print camel at the three verses.
Why this verdict
Claims about the text
Confidence: high
All eight Greek editions STEPBible compares print camel at the three verses. Plummer reports the rope reading only in a few late manuscripts of Matthew and Luke, and Broadus reports camel in the Coptic, Latin and PeshittaPeshittaAn ancient Syriac version of the Old and New Testaments used in Syriac churches. The Jewish Encyclopedia explains its name as “the simple one”.From: HirschAll terms → versions; no manuscripts were collated here. The rope case rests not on the printed Greek but on how the word was understood (Cyril, CalvinJohn CalvinA Protestant reformer (1509–1564) who settled in Geneva in 1536, with an interval away, according to the 1911 Encyclopaedia Britannica. Alongside the Institutes of the Christian Religion, he wrote commentaries on Scripture.From: Alexander; Alexander; Alexander; Alexander; AlexanderAll terms →) or on the AramaicAramaicA Semitic language closely related to Hebrew. The HarperCollins Bible Dictionary notes that parts of Ezra, Daniel and Jeremiah and a phrase in Genesis are written in Aramaic; Jesus probably spoke a Western Aramaic dialect.From: Daniel 2:4; Powell; Perrin; PowellAll terms → behind it (Bain, as Lorah quotes him).^{7 sources}7 sources9. this site's data 13. Plummer 1914 14. Bible 11. Broadus 1886 15. Smith) 1859 16. Pringle 1845 17. Jr. 1996
Cross-community agreement · Plummer calls the rope reading, found in a few late manuscripts, a toning down; Broadus calls the cable reading an attempt to soften the image, and Metzger, as Lorah quotes him, an attempt to soften the rigour of the statement. Calvin's 1845 editor wrote that critics had very generally abandoned the cable idea. Cyril reads the word as a thick cable and Calvin as a sailor's rope; Lorah quotes Bain that the Aramaic word gmla can mean rope or camel. (as of 2026-11-09)
What would change this verdict: Early manuscripts or versions, collated directly, reading the rope word.
Open
The camel saying adapts a proverb already current in Jesus' day
The Talmud's elephant sayings show the same kind of impossibility image, but they are later texts.
Why this verdict
Claims about the text
Confidence: medium
The Talmud's elephant sayings show the same kind of impossibility image, but they are later texts. Broadus allows that Jesus may have used a proverb, yet finds no proof one was current then. Ziemińska suggests a Semitic impossibility saying was most likely put into Jesus' mouth; Bruce takes the differing Greek words as renderings of a Semitic original. These are distinct proposals, and none dates the saying.^{5 sources}5 sources18. edition 19. edition 11. Broadus 1886 20. Ziemińska 2022 21. Bruce 1897
Contested · Ziemińska (critical) proposes attribution of a Semitic saying to Jesus; Broadus (a Baptist commentator) allows a proverb but finds no proof of its currency; Bruce argues for a Semitic original wording without deciding who coined it. (as of 2026-11-09)
What would change this verdict: A dated source showing the proverb in circulation before or during Jesus' lifetime.
Outside what evidence can settle
God makes possible the salvation of the rich that people cannot achieve
This is the theological content of Jesus' reply.
Why this verdict
Theological claims
Confidence: high
This is the theological content of Jesus' reply. ChrysostomJohn ChrysostomBishop of Constantinople from 398 (about 347–407), called “golden-mouthed” for his eloquence. The Catholic Encyclopedia calls him the chief representative of Antioch’s grammatical-historical interpretation, which opposed Origen’s allegorical reading.From: Baur; Baur; Baur; BaurAll terms → connects it with great grace and the rich person's renunciation; Piper reads it as God's effectual enabling; Wesley calls the saying, humanly speaking, an absolute impossibility. How salvation becomes possible is a question of theology, not of historical evidence.^{4 sources}4 sources4. Matthew 19:26 22. 1 23. Piper 2000 24. Wesley
Contested · Chrysostom joins grace and renunciation; Piper argues for effectual grace rather than a grace that only makes faith possible for all. (as of 2026-11-09)

What people get wrong

Text

Things people commonly believe the text says, checked against it.

A common belief among believers
Myth The needle's eye gate is an established fact about Jerusalem in Jesus' time.
Actually Ziemińska found no ancient evidence of such a gate. The earliest mention she identifies is a medieval gloss, and the nineteenth-century name Nugent reports belongs to a gate at Hebron.^{4 sources}4 sources7. Ziemińska 2022 10. Ziemińska 2022 11. Broadus 1886 25. Nugent-Grenville) 1846
A common belief among believers
Myth The gate story goes back to Theophylact's commentary.
Actually Ziemińska finds no gate in Theophylact's comment on Matthew 19:24; he reports that some take the camel as a sailor's cable. She names Fee and Stuart among writers who repeat the attribution, and identifies the gloss attributed to Anselm as the earliest apparent gate reference.^{10 8}
A common belief among believers
Myth In Mark, Jesus says only that it is hard for those who trust in riches.
Actually Five of the eight Greek editions STEPBible compares, including NA28 and SBLGNT, lack the words about trusting in riches; Bruce calls them a scribal toning down, though the Sinaitic Syriac has them. Wesley denies that Mark 10:24 retracts the hard saying, since it is as hard for those who have riches not to trust in them.^{4 sources}4 sources26. this site's data 27. this site's data 28. Bruce 1897 29. Wesley

Show 3 more misconceptions

A common belief among skeptics
Myth Reading 'camel' as a rope is always a way of softening the saying.
Actually Plummer calls the cable reading (κάμιλον), found only in a few late manuscripts, an attempt to tone down a strong statement; Broadus calls the cable reading only an attempt to soften the incongruity of the image. But Lorah argues that a heavy ship's hawser makes the image stronger, not less impossible, and Calvin, who read rope, still read the saying as amplifying the difficulty for the rich.^{4 sources}4 sources13. Plummer 1914 11. Broadus 1886 30. Jr. 1996 16. Pringle 1845
A common belief among skeptics
Myth Early Christians who distinguished wealth from its use removed the saying's severity.
Actually Chrysostom says Jesus blames not riches but those held in subjection by them, yet reads the camel comparison as impossibility in the highest degree. Clement calls wealth an instrument good or bad by its use, but says a rich man ruled by his wealth will sooner see the camel pass.^{22 31}
A common belief among skeptics
Myth The gate story is known to have been invented to let the rich into heaven.
Actually That motive is Jason Colavito's inference. The earliest gloss applies the gate morally: the rich must put off the burden of sin and riches. Ziemińska, for her part, concludes that the gate procedure suggested the rich could get through with difficulty.^{32 33 20}

Hard questions

The strongest case, the strongest responses, then a plain assessment of where the logic holds.

Was there a gate called the needle's eye, and where does the idea come from?

The gate explanation is documented from a medieval gloss onward, but no ancient evidence for such a gate in Jesus' time was found in the sources checked.

See the argument

The strongest case

The gate reading has a long pedigree. A gloss in Aquinas's Catena aurea, attributed to Anselm, says that at Jerusalem there was a gate called the needle's eye, through which a camel could pass only on its knees after its burden was taken off, and it draws the moral that the rich must put off the burden of sin and riches. Hugh of Saint-Cher, in the thirteenth century, wrote of a gate in Jerusalem called the needle, and the fifteenth-century pilgrim Johannes Poloner described a small door locally called the eye of a needle, both as Ziemińska reports. In 1846 Lord Nugent reported camel drivers at Hebron calling a small side arch the eye of the needle, and in 2022 Candida Moss reported a Jerusalem church identifying an opening as the eye of the needle.^{8 sources}8 sources33. (ed.) 1841 34. Ziemińska 2022 7. Ziemińska 2022 25. Nugent-Grenville) 1846 35. Moss 2022 8. Ziemińska 2022 11. Broadus 1886 12. Whiston

P1. The three Gospels compare a camel passing through a needle's eye with a rich person entering God's kingdom.^{36 37 38}No listed response challenges this premise
P2. Medieval writers from the gloss onward place a gate called the needle's eye in Jerusalem, and later travellers report the name in local use.^{4 sources}4 sources33. (ed.) 1841 34. Ziemińska 2022 7. Ziemińska 2022 25. Nugent-Grenville) 1846No listed response challenges this premise
P3. So Jesus was referring to a real gate, which a camel can pass by kneeling and being unloaded.

→ Conclusion. The saying pictures a hard but possible passage; the rich can enter by laying down their burden.

Strongest responses

Academic (critical) challenges P3

No ancient trace of the name. Ziemińska finds no ancient evidence of the phrase as the name of a Jerusalem gate in Jesus' time or earlier. The earliest mention she identifies seems to be the gloss attributed to Anselm; if the attribution is right, it points to an eleventh- or twelfth-century source, though she allows a lost earlier one. Josephus names Jerusalem gates without this one, but his description does not list every small entrance.^{5 sources}5 sources7. Ziemińska 2022 8. Ziemińska 2022 10. Ziemińska 2022 11. Broadus 1886 12. Whiston

Tradition unspecified challenges P3

The names may come from the saying. Broadus judges that, so far as such gate names really existed, they probably arose from the saying itself, in the New Testament, the Talmud and the Koran, together with JeromeJeromeA Latin Church Father associated with the Vulgate, born in the fourth century and deceased in 420. Birth dates differ: Louis Saltet gives about 340–342, while Dionisio Candido gives 347.From: Saltet; CandidoAll terms →'s allegory; he calls the gloss 'to all appearance' a conjecture suggested by Jerome's remark about camels entering Jerusalem. The direction of influence may run from saying to name. Patch (1915) adds that no such use of the word exists in Bible lands, which conflicts with Nugent's report.^{11 39 25}

Protestant: evangelical challenges the conclusion

A stooping camel needs no miracle. Buettel argues that getting a camel to stoop through a small gate would not need divine intervention, so the gate reading cannot fit Jesus' reply that salvation is impossible for man but possible for God. Piper says the context will not allow the gate interpretation.^{5 sources}5 sources40. Buettel 2015 23. Piper 2000 4. Matthew 19:26 5. Mark 10:27 6. Luke 18:27

Plain assessment

The gloss and Hugh of Saint-Cher document a medieval explanation, Poloner a fifteenth-century local name and Nugent a nineteenth-century name at Hebron. None of them is ancient, and Ziemińska found no ancient evidence for a gate of that name. Broadus's proposal that the names, and the gloss itself, grew from the saying and Jerome's allegory explains the later reports, but it remains his inference. The silence of Josephus is weak evidence either way.

What would change this assessment: A dated source from Jesus' time or earlier naming such a gate.

Assessment uses: The gate story's traceable history · Later names, and what they can show · Early church: Latin · A Jerusalem gate called the needle's eye existed in Jesus' time · Protestant: evangelical

Does 'camel' really mean a rope or ship's cable?

The compared Greek editions print camel and the rope reading is reported only in late manuscripts; rope is an old interpretation whose Aramaic argument was not checked here.

See the argument

The strongest case

Cyril of Alexandria says Jesus means not the animal but a thick cable, because sailors call their thicker cables camels; Theophylact, as Ziemińska translates him, reports that some say the same, and Broadus mentions a scholium ascribed to OrigenOrigenA Christian scholar and teacher of Alexandria, born in 185 and deceased probably in 253 or 254, according to the Catholic Encyclopedia. Marco Rizzi explains that he interpreted the Septuagint allegorically, like Philo.From: Prat; Prat; Prat; Rizzi; PratAll terms →. Calvin thought camel denotes a sailor's rope. Theodore Lorah quotes Alan Bain that the Peshitta's Aramaic word gmla can mean rope or camel and that Aramaic-speaking churches have received rope here; Insight on the Scriptures reports that Lamsa's translation puts rope. In Islamic tradition, Ibn KathirIbn KathirAn Arab historian and scholar who taught at Damascus (1301–1373), according to the first Encyclopaedia of Islam. He wrote a universal history and a commentary on the Qur’an.From: Islam; Islam; IslamAll terms → reports that Ibn Abbas recited the word in Qur'an 7:40 as jummal, a thick rope.^{11 sources}11 sources15. Smith) 1859 10. Ziemińska 2022 11. Broadus 1886 9. this site's data 13. Plummer 1914 41. Jr. 1996 16. Pringle 1845 17. Jr. 1996 14. Bible 42. translation 43. translation

P1. Cyril and Calvin read the camel as a sailor's cable, and Theophylact reports that some did.^{15 16 10}No listed response challenges this premise
P2. According to Bain, as Lorah quotes him, the Aramaic word gmla can mean rope or camel.^{17 14}
P3. So the saying originally pictured a thick rope, and camel is a misreading of it.

→ Conclusion. Jesus compared the rich person's entry to a rope, not an animal, passing through a needle's eye.

Strongest responses

Tradition unspecified challenges P3

The Greek text reads camel. All eight Greek editions STEPBible compares print camel at the three verses. Plummer reports the rope reading only in a few late manuscripts of Matthew and Luke and calls it an attempt to tone down a strong statement; Metzger, as Lorah quotes him, calls it an attempt to soften the rigour of the statement. Calvin's 1845 English editor noted that critics, who had once leaned strongly to the cable idea, had by then very generally abandoned it.^{4 sources}4 sources9. this site's data 13. Plummer 1914 41. Jr. 1996 44. note) 1845

Tradition unspecified challenges P2

The ancient versions give camel. Broadus reports camel in the Coptic, Latin and Peshitta versions, which bears on Bain's claim about the Peshitta's word. He calls the cable reading, in Cyril, a scholium ascribed to Origen and the 'some' reported by Theophylact and Euthymius, only an attempt to soften the incongruity of the image. Bain's lexical claim was not checked here against Syriac sources.^{11 17}

Plain assessment

Camel is what the compared Greek editions print, and Plummer and Broadus treat the rope reading as late or secondary. The rope case rests on how interpreters understood the word (Cyril, Calvin, those Theophylact reports) and on Bain's claim about the Aramaic, which Lorah quotes and which sits uneasily with Broadus's report that the Peshitta gives camel; neither the Aramaic word nor the manuscripts were checked directly here. Ibn Abbas's jummal raises the same question about an Arabic word, not about the Gospel text.

What would change this assessment: A direct collation of early manuscripts and versions, and checked Aramaic lexical evidence for gmla.

Assessment uses: Camel or cable · The Greek text of the saying has camel (κάμηλον), not the rope word (κάμιλον) · Early church: Greek · Protestant: Reformed · Orthodox · Camel or rope in the Qur'an

Do the Talmud's elephant sayings show where the image came from?

The parallels illustrate an idiom of impossibility, but they do not date a proverb to Jesus' day or show whether he coined it, used it or was credited with it.

See the argument

The strongest case

The Babylonian Talmud twice has an elephant passing through a needle's eye, once about dreams and once in a jibe at Pumbedita's reasoning; Plummer cites a camel dancing in a small corn measure; Bruce reports Furrer's claim that camel-and-needle proverbs for the impossible were still current among Arabs. Ziemińska, a critical scholar, describes the image of a huge pack animal passing through a tiny opening as a saying used in Semitic circles for impossibility, and suggests that it was therefore most likely put into Jesus' mouth.^{6 sources}6 sources18. edition 19. edition 11. Broadus 1886 21. Bruce 1897 20. Ziemińska 2022 45. translation

P1. Berakhot 55b and Bava Metzia 38b use an elephant passing through a needle's eye, in different discussions.^{18 19}No listed response challenges this premise
P2. Ziemińska describes the huge animal and tiny opening as a saying used in Semitic circles for impossibility.²⁰No listed response challenges this premise
P3. She infers that the saying was therefore most likely put into Jesus' mouth.²⁰

→ Conclusion. On Ziemińska's account, the comparison came from common Semitic idiom and was attributed to Jesus.

Strongest responses

Tradition unspecified challenges P3

Using a proverb is not inventing one, and none is dated. Broadus accepts the Talmud's elephant as an expression of impossibility and allows that Jesus may have been using a proverb, but holds that there is no proof such a saying was current in his time. He and Plummer read the parallels as showing an idiom of impossibility, not as dating a proverb to Jesus' day.¹¹

Tradition unspecified challenges the framing

Semitic wording is a separate question. Bruce argues that the Gospels' different Greek words for the needle and its eye point to separate renderings of a saying originally given in a Semitic language. He also reports Furrer's claim that camel-and-needle proverbs for the impossible were still current among Arabs.^{21 46}

Plain assessment

Broadus and Plummer read the parallels as idioms of impossibility. In context, Berakhot uses the elephant for an image outside a dreamer's waking thoughts, Bava Metzia to mock an argument, and the Qur'an for those who will never enter Paradise. The rabbinic parallels are later, and Broadus finds no proof that a proverb was current in Jesus' day. Ziemińska's suggestion that the saying was put into Jesus' mouth and Bruce's case for a Semitic original are proposals about origin, not results of the parallels.

What would change this assessment: Dated evidence for the proverb's circulation before or during Jesus' lifetime.

Assessment uses: The Talmud's elephant and the needle · Camel or rope in the Qur'an · The camel saying adapts a proverb already current in Jesus' day · The needle and its eye

Does the saying condemn wealth itself?

The cited traditions condemn bondage to wealth rather than wealth itself while keeping the warning; whether that softens the command to sell is a judgment evidence cannot settle.

See the argument

The strongest case

Taken at its word, the passage is hard on wealth: Jesus tells the man to sell his possessions and give to the poor, then says the camel will pass through the needle's eye more easily than a rich person enters the kingdom. Ziemińska concludes that the statement is radical and should remain so. Skeptic writer Jason Colavito calls the gate story a medieval fabrication invented to justify sending the rich to heaven, and sets the saying against a line he quotes from Joel Osteen about God wanting to increase people financially.^{16 sources}16 sources47. Matthew 19:21 48. Mark 10:21 49. Luke 18:22 50. Matthew 19:23 51. Mark 10:23 52. Luke 18:24 20. Ziemińska 2022 32. Colavito 2012 33. (ed.) 1841 31. Wilson 22. 1 53. Pringle 1845 54. Church 1997 55. Wesley 56. (Alfeyev) 2015 40. Buettel 2015

P1. Jesus commands the man to sell his possessions and give to the poor, then warns about rich people entering the kingdom.^{9 sources}9 sources47. Matthew 19:21 48. Mark 10:21 49. Luke 18:22 50. Matthew 19:23 51. Mark 10:23 52. Luke 18:24 36. Matthew 19:24 37. Mark 10:25 38. Luke 18:25No listed response challenges this premise
P2. Colavito argues that the gate story was invented to justify the rich and that a promise of financial increase contradicts the saying.³²No listed response challenges this premise
P3. So readings that let the rich keep their wealth accommodate what the saying rules out.

→ Conclusion. The saying condemns wealth itself, not only its misuse.

Strongest responses

Early church: Greek challenges P3

Ruled by riches, not owning them. Clement calls wealth an instrument, blameless in itself and good or bad by its use, and reads the command to sell as spoken of the passions; yet a rich man ruled by his wealth, he says, will sooner see the camel pass. Chrysostom says Jesus blames not riches but those held in subjection by them, while reading the camel as impossibility in the highest degree.^{31 22}

Catholic challenges P3

Detachment is required of everyone. The Catechism teaches that the precept of detachment from riches is obligatory for entrance into the Kingdom of heaven. It requires detachment of every believer rather than condemning possession as such, and adds that the Lord grieves over the rich who find consolation in abundance.⁵⁴

Orthodox challenges the conclusion

What the pursuit of wealth produces. Metropolitan Hilarion says the saying condemns neither riches nor money themselves, but what can result from the pursuit of wealth, and that the Kingdom is given to those who share. Fr Seraphim Holland says the Church has never regarded wealth as inherently evil, but the holding on to it.^{56 57}

Protestant: Reformed challenges the framing

The danger lies in human depravity. Calvin writes that riches do not in their own nature hinder anyone from following God, but that through human depravity it is scarcely possible for the very rich to avoid being intoxicated by them. On his reading wealth itself is not condemned, but the danger is near universal.⁵³

Protestant: Methodist challenges P3

Gain and save in order to give. Wesley's rules are to gain all you can, save all you can and give all you can; gaining must not harm one's neighbour, and gaining and saving are nothing without giving. He also denies that Mark's words about trusting in riches soften the warning, since it is as hard for those who have riches not to trust in them.^{55 29}

Plain assessment

None of the cited Christian readings condemns possession as such, and none drops the warning. Clement and Chrysostom place the danger in being ruled by riches, Calvin in human depravity; the CatechismCatechism of the Catholic ChurchAn official summary of Catholic teaching that John Paul II ordered published in 1992, declaring it a sure norm for teaching the faith. He approved and promulgated its Latin typical edition in 1997.From: II; II; II; II; IIAll terms → requires detachment of everyone, Wesley ties gaining and saving to giving, and Hilarion links the Kingdom to sharing. Whether those distinctions honour or soften the command to sell is the point in dispute. Colavito's motive for the gate story is his inference, and the earliest gloss asks the rich to lay down sin and riches. No prosperity teacher's own exposition of the passage was found; Osteen's line reaches us through Colavito.

What would change this assessment: A prosperity teacher's own sustained exposition of this passage, or a tradition reading it as condemning possession itself.

Assessment uses: Matt.19.21 · Early church: Greek · Early church: Greek · Protestant: Reformed · Catholic · Protestant: Methodist · Orthodox · Skeptic/secular · What the prosperity reports can and cannot show

Do the gate and rope explanations soften the saying?

The gate reading turns impossibility into difficulty, as its critics argue and no cited source answers; the rope reading need not, since Lorah and Calvin keep the saying severe.

See the argument

The strongest case

A. B. Bruce says the figure is to be taken as it stands, not 'civilised' by making the camel a cable or the needle's eye the wicket of an Oriental house. Swete says attempts to soften the proverb, by a ship's cable, a narrow wady or a gate a camel can scarcely pass, miss the point of a simile meant to put the impossibility in the strongest light. Broadus finds it perfectly evident that Jesus was understood as stating an impossibility. Mark Woods notes that the gate picture implies a rich person who was not very rich, or gave a lot away, would be all right.^{12 sources}12 sources58. Bruce 1897 59. Swete 1898 11. Broadus 1886 60. Woods 2015 20. Ziemińska 2022 40. Buettel 2015 30. Jr. 1996 16. Pringle 1845 53. Pringle 1845 4. Matthew 19:26 22. 1 23. Piper 2000

P1. The hearers ask who then can be saved, and Jesus replies that it is impossible for people but not for God.^{6 sources}6 sources1. Matthew 19:25 2. Mark 10:26 3. Luke 18:26 4. Matthew 19:26 5. Mark 10:27 6. Luke 18:27No listed response challenges this premise
P2. Reading the camel as a cable, or the needle as a gate, makes the image less than impossible.^{58 59}
P3. An image of something hard but possible cannot explain why the hearers ask who can be saved and Jesus appeals to God.^{11 40}No listed response challenges this premise

→ Conclusion. Both the gate and the rope soften the saying, which should be read as an impossibility.

Strongest responses

Tradition unspecified challenges P2

A cable can make the image stronger. Lorah argues that a heavy ship's hawser through a needle would make the image stronger, not at all less impossible or less hyperbolic. A rope reading can therefore keep the force that Bruce and Swete want protected.^{30 58 59}

Protestant: Reformed challenges P2

Rope, with the warning intact. Calvin thought camel denotes a sailor's rope, yet still read the saying as amplifying the difficulty for the rich, and wrote that it is scarcely possible for the very rich to avoid being intoxicated by riches. Choosing rope did not soften his point.^{16 53}

Plain assessment

The two explanations need separate verdicts. Against the gate, Ziemińska argues that it turns impossibility into difficulty and Buettel that a stooping camel needs no divine help; no source gathered here answers them on the gate's behalf. For the rope, the charge does not hold in general: Lorah argues a hawser makes the image stronger, and Calvin read rope while keeping the warning severe. Jesus' reply about God's power is theological; Chrysostom reads it as great grace, Piper as effectual enabling.

What would change this assessment: A defender of the gate reading who explains how a passable gate fits both the hearers' alarm and Jesus' appeal to God.

Assessment uses: Academic (critical) · Protestant: evangelical · Protestant: Reformed · Early church: Greek · The Greek text of the saying has camel (κάμηλον), not the rope word (κάμιλον) · God makes possible the salvation of the rich that people cannot achieve · Camel or cable

What the texts say

Matthew 19:21 — A man asks what he must do to gain eternal life. Jesus tells him to sell his possessions, give to the poor and follow him, promising treasure in heaven. Matthew begins the commands with 'if you want to be perfect'; Mark and Luke begin with 'one thing you lack'.^{6 sources}6 sources61. Matthew 19:16 62. Mark 10:17 63. Luke 18:18 47. Matthew 19:21 48. Mark 10:21 49. Luke 18:22
Matthew 19:23–24 — Jesus says it is hard for a rich person to enter the kingdom, then gives the camel-and-needle comparison. Mark and Luke follow the same sequence.^{6 sources}6 sources50. Matthew 19:23 51. Mark 10:23 52. Luke 18:24 36. Matthew 19:24 37. Mark 10:25 38. Luke 18:25
Matthew 19:25–26 — The greatly astonished disciples ask who can be saved. Jesus says it is impossible for people, but all things are possible with God. Broadus and Buettel read this exchange as evidence that the saying describes an impossibility.^{8 sources}8 sources1. Matthew 19:25 2. Mark 10:26 3. Luke 18:26 4. Matthew 19:26 5. Mark 10:27 6. Luke 18:27 11. Broadus 1886 40. Buettel 2015

Show 2 more key verses

Mark 10:23–27 — In Mark alone, the disciples are amazed at Jesus' words before the comparison, Jesus repeats how hard it is, and they are even more astonished afterward. As in the other two accounts, the question about salvation and Jesus' answer about God follow.^{7 sources}7 sources64. Mark 10:24 2. Mark 10:26 1. Matthew 19:25 3. Luke 18:26 4. Matthew 19:26 5. Mark 10:27 6. Luke 18:27
Luke 18:24–27 — Luke gives the same warning, comparison, question and reply. He leaves out the amazement and has 'those who heard' ask the question rather than the disciples.^{12 sources}12 sources50. Matthew 19:23 51. Mark 10:23 52. Luke 18:24 36. Matthew 19:24 37. Mark 10:25 38. Luke 18:25 1. Matthew 19:25 2. Mark 10:26 3. Luke 18:26 4. Matthew 19:26 5. Mark 10:27 6. Luke 18:27

Background

The encounter behind the saying Text

A man asks Jesus about eternal life. The familiar label 'rich young ruler' combines Matthew's description of him as young with Luke's description of him as a ruler; Mark alone says he ran up and knelt. All three describe his wealth. The camel saying follows the encounter, and Jesus widens the warning to rich people.^{8 sources}8 sources61. Matthew 19:16 62. Mark 10:17 63. Luke 18:18 65. Matthew 19:20 66. Matthew 19:22 50. Matthew 19:23 51. Mark 10:23 52. Luke 18:24

The gate story's traceable history Scholarship

Agnieszka Ziemińska (2022) finds no ancient evidence of the phrase as the name of a Jerusalem gate. The earliest mention she identifies seems to be a gloss attributed to Anselm (eleventh century), preserved in Aquinas's thirteenth-century Catena aurea; if the attribution is right, the source is eleventh or twelfth century. She also reports Hugh of Saint-Cher's thirteenth-century gate called 'the needle', and, following Gnilka, the fifteenth-century pilgrim Johannes Poloner's small door locally called the eye of a needle. The small-gate theory, she says, gained popularity in the nineteenth century.^{5 sources}5 sources7. Ziemińska 2022 8. Ziemińska 2022 10. Ziemińska 2022 11. Broadus 1886 34. Ziemińska 2022

Later names, and what they can show Evidence

Lord Nugent's travel book (1846) reports camel drivers at a double gateway in Hebron calling its small side arch 'the hole or eye of the needle'. James Patch (International Standard Bible Encyclopaedia, 1915) says no such use of the word exists in Bible lands; the two reports conflict. Candida Moss (2022) reports that the Russian Orthodox Church of St Alexander Nevsky in Jerusalem identifies an opening in a wall as the 'eye of the needle'. Broadus judges that such names probably arose from the saying itself and from Jerome's allegory.^{4 sources}4 sources25. Nugent-Grenville) 1846 39. Patch 1915 35. Moss 2022 11. Broadus 1886

Show 3 more background topics (The Talmud's elephant and the needle; Camel or rope in the Qur'an; What the prosperity reports can and cannot show)

The Talmud's elephant and the needle Tradition

In Berakhot 55b, Rava illustrates the teaching that dreams reflect waking thoughts: no one is shown a golden palm tree or an elephant passing through a needle's eye. In Bava Metzia 38b, Rav Sheshet mocks a colleague by asking whether he comes from Pumbedita, where people pass an elephant through the eye of a needle; the modern Koren-Steinsaltz translation explains the jibe as specious reasoning, a gloss not in the Talmud's own words. Broadus and Plummer read these as idioms of impossibility.^{4 sources}4 sources18. edition 19. edition 67. edition 11. Broadus 1886

Camel or rope in the Qur'an Tradition

Qur'an 7:40 says that those who arrogantly deny God's signs will not enter Paradise until a camel passes through the eye of a needle, a way of saying never. Ibn Kathir takes the Arabic jamal as a male camel but reports that Ibn Abbas recited it as jummal, a thick rope; Abdel Haleem's modern translation follows the rope sense. The same camel-or-rope question thus arises in Islamic exegesis, on an Arabic word. Plummer and Broadus suppose the Qur'an borrowed the image from the Gospels; that is their hypothesis.^{45 42}

What the prosperity reports can and cannot show Scholarship

Jason Colavito quotes Joel Osteen, from a 2012 Newsweek sidebar, saying that God wants to increase people financially, and argues that this contradicts the camel saying. The Osteen line reaches us only through Colavito and is not about this verse. Cameron Buettel says the gate theory is predominant among many prosperity preachers and televangelists, but names none. No prosperity teacher's own exposition of this passage was found.^{32 40}

Where translations differ

Text

Where the wording in different Bibles diverges, and why.

Mark 10:25 · Luke 18:25 · “Camel or cable” κάμηλον / κάμιλον

The animal word, κάμηλον, is printed at all three verses in each of the eight editions STEPBible compares, from NA28 to the Textus Receptus; none prints κάμιλον, the rope word. Alfred Plummer reports the rope reading in Matthew and Luke only in a few late manuscripts and calls it an attempt to tone down a strong statement. Cyril of Alexandria and Calvin keep the printed word but take it to mean a sailor's cable.^{4 sources}4 sources9. this site's data 13. Plummer 1914 15. Smith) 1859 16. Pringle 1845

Open in compare →

Mark 10:25 · Luke 18:25 · “The needle and its eye” τρυπήματος ῥαφίδος / τρυμαλιᾶς ῥαφίδος / τρήματος βελόνης

In NA28 and SBLGNT, Matthew, Mark and Luke each use a different word for the eye; Matthew and Mark share ῥαφίς for the needle, while Luke has βελόνη. Other editions vary. A. B. Bruce takes the variation as pointing to different Greek renderings of a saying originally given in a Semitic language; that is his inference.^{5 sources}5 sources46. this site's data 36. Matthew 19:24 37. Mark 10:25 38. Luke 18:25 21. Bruce 1897

Open in compare →

Mark 10:24 · “Trusting in riches”

Of the eight Greek editions STEPBible compares, only Tregelles, the Textus Receptus and the Byzantine text print the words about those who trust in riches; NA28, NA27, Tyndale House, SBLGNT and Westcott-Hort omit them. Of nine English editions in the database, only the Berean Standard Bible leaves them out, giving them in a footnote. Bruce calls the words a toning down more worthy of a scribe than of Jesus, though he notes the Sinaitic Syriac has them. Wesley denies that the words retract the hard saying, since it is as hard for those who have riches not to trust in them.^{6 sources}6 sources26. this site's data 27. this site's data 68. this site's data 69. this site's data 28. Bruce 1897 29. Wesley

Open in compare →

How it has been interpreted

Tradition

How different traditions read these texts, in their own terms.

Early church: Greek · Clement of Alexandria — wealth as an instrument

Clement insists that Jesus' words about the rich must not be heard carnally but searched for their hidden meaning. He reads the command to sell as spoken of the passions of the soul, and calls wealth an instrument, blameless in itself and good or bad by its use; riches that benefit one's neighbours are not to be thrown away. A rich man ruled by his wealth, he says, will sooner see the camel pass. Łukasz Koszałka (2026) argues that Clement shifts the focus from external possession to inner disposition.^{70 31 71}

Early church: Greek · John Chrysostom — the highest degree of impossibility

In his Homily 63 on Matthew, Chrysostom says Jesus blames not riches but those held in subjection by them, and the covetous even more. Yet he reads the move from 'hard' to the camel as showing that entry is impossible in the highest degree, and takes Jesus' reply as showing that great grace is needed.^{22 4}

Early church: Latin · Jerome — hard, not impossible, and the camels of Midian

In Aquinas's excerpts, Jerome opens with the plain sense: no rich man can be saved. Of the earlier 'hard' saying he notes that Jesus says hard, not impossible, which points to rarity. He then compares the rich to the camels of Midian and Ephah in Isaiah 60, which may enter the narrow way once they lay aside the load of sins. This is an allegory, not a report of a gate.^{72 73}

Show 9 more interpretations (Early church: Greek, Catholic, Orthodox…)

Early church: Greek · Cyril of Alexandria — a sailor's cable

In his homilies on Luke, Cyril says that by camel Jesus means not the animal but a thick cable, because sailors call their thicker cables camels. Read here in an 1859 translation of the Syriac version, he is a fifth-century witness to the reading but not necessarily its first: Broadus also mentions a scholium ascribed to Origen.^{15 11}

Catholic · The Catechism — detachment required of all

The Catechism teaches that the precept of detachment from riches is obligatory for entrance into the Kingdom of heaven. It says that in all three Synoptic Gospels the call to the rich young man is joined to the call to poverty and chastity, and that the evangelicalEvangelicalThe National Association of Evangelicals describes evangelicals as people who take the Bible seriously and believe in Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord; it derives the name from Greek euangelion, “good news” or “gospel”.From: EvangelicalsAll terms → counsels are inseparable from the commandments. That joining is its doctrinal synthesis; the encounters themselves command selling, giving and following.^{5 sources}5 sources54. Church 1997 74. Church 1997 47. Matthew 19:21 48. Mark 10:21 49. Luke 18:22

Orthodox · Theophylact, Metropolitan Hilarion and Fr Seraphim Holland

Theophylact's eleventh-century commentary, as Ziemińska translates it, reports that some say the camel is the thick cable sailors use to cast anchors; it mentions no gate. Metropolitan Hilarion (Alfeyev), in a 2015 homily, says the saying condemns neither riches nor money but what can result from the pursuit of wealth, and that the Kingdom is given to those who share. Fr Seraphim Holland says the Church has never regarded wealth as inherently evil, but the holding on to it.^{10 56 57}

Protestant: Reformed · Calvin and Piper — rope, danger and effectual grace

Calvin thought camel denotes a sailor's rope, yet still read the saying as amplifying the rich person's difficulty. Riches, he says, do not in their own nature hinder anyone from following God, but through human depravity it is scarcely possible for the very rich to avoid being intoxicated by them. John Piper (2000) says there is no such gate and the context will not allow it, and reads Jesus' reply as God effectually enabling people to leave their riches and follow Christ.^{16 53 23}

Protestant: Methodist · John Wesley — humanly impossible

Wesley's Notes call the saying a proverbial expression meaning that, humanly speaking, it is an absolute impossibility. He denies that Mark's words about trusting in riches retract it, since it is as hard for those who have riches not to trust in them. His sermon 'The Use of Money' gives three rules: gain all you can, save all you can, give all you can; gaining must not harm one's neighbour, and gaining and saving are nothing without giving.^{24 29 55}

Protestant: evangelical · Cameron Buettel — the context requires impossibility

Buettel argues that getting a camel to stoop through a small gate would not need divine intervention, so the gate reading cannot fit Jesus' reply that salvation is impossible for man but possible for God. He quotes John MacArthur's commentary that there is no evidence such a gate ever existed; the commentary itself was not read here.^{40 75}

Jehovah's Witnesses · Insight on the Scriptures — a literal needle

Insight on the Scriptures notes that some have held the needle's eye to be a small gate, but argues from the Greek words that a literal needle is meant. It also reports that George Lamsa's translation puts rope, with a footnote saying the Aramaic gamla means rope and camel; Lamsa is known here only through that report.^{76 14}

Academic (critical) · Agnieszka Ziemińska — the radical image

Ziemińska concludes that the gate procedure tried to suggest that the rich could get through with difficulty, and that Jesus' statement is radical and should remain so. Separately, she describes the huge animal and tiny opening as a saying used in Semitic circles for impossibility, and suggests it was therefore most likely put into Jesus' mouth; that is a judgment about origins, not a finding of her study of the gate.²⁰

Skeptic/secular · Jason Colavito — a story for the rich

Skeptic writer Jason Colavito calls the gate story a medieval fabrication invented to justify sending the rich to heaven. The medieval date fits Ziemińska's findings; the motive is his inference. The earliest gloss reads the gate morally, requiring the rich to put off the burden of sin and riches.^{32 33 8}

Where else the Bible mentions it

Text

Matthew 23:24 Jesus uses the camel in another exaggerated image, aimed at blind guides: the gnat strained out, the camel swallowed. Broadus compares this verse to show that the camel saying is hyperbole of the same kind; the ISBE article 'Needle' (1915) makes the same comparison.
²⁴You blind guides! You strain out a gnat but swallow a camel.
Read in context →
Isaiah 60:6 Jerome uses Isaiah's camels of Midian and Ephah coming to Jerusalem in his allegory of laying aside sin. Broadus suspects this helped give rise to the later gate gloss; that connection is his hypothesis.
⁶Caravans of camels will cover your land, young camels of Midian and Ephah, and all from Sheba will come, bearing gold and frankincense and proclaiming the praises of the LORD.
Read in context →

Test your understanding

What follows the camel comparison in all three accounts?

The hearers ask who then can be saved, and Jesus contrasts what is impossible for people with what God can do.^{6 sources}6 sources1. Matthew 19:25 2. Mark 10:26 3. Luke 18:26 4. Matthew 19:26 5. Mark 10:27 6. Luke 18:27

Matthew 19:25–26 Mark 10:26–27 Luke 18:26–27

What is the earliest gate mention Ziemińska identifies?

A gloss attributed to Anselm of Canterbury, preserved in Aquinas's thirteenth-century Catena aurea; its earlier date depends on the attribution.^{8 10 11}

What do the two Talmud elephant passages discuss?

Berakhot 55b discusses dreams and waking thoughts; Bava Metzia 38b uses the image to mock an argument.^{18 19}

Keep going

The rich young man Coming

The whole encounter: a man asks about eternal life, Jesus tells him to sell, give and follow, and the camel saying follows.^{9 sources}9 sources61. Matthew 19:16 62. Mark 10:17 63. Luke 18:18 47. Matthew 19:21 48. Mark 10:21 49. Luke 18:22 36. Matthew 19:24 37. Mark 10:25 38. Luke 18:25

Matthew 19:16–26

Cite this page

Plain citation

Is the 'eye of the needle' a gate in Jerusalem? Know the Text. Question lens, version 1, revised 2026-11-09, Fact-checked. https://knowthetext.com/question/questions/matthew-19-24/

Chicago-style note

Know the Text, “Is the 'eye of the needle' a gate in Jerusalem?” Question lens, version 1, revised 2026-11-09, Fact-checked, https://knowthetext.com/question/questions/matthew-19-24/.

BibTeX

@misc{knowthetext-matthew-19-24,
  author = {{Know the Text}},
  title = {Is the 'eye of the needle' a gate in Jerusalem?},
  howpublished = {Know the Text, Question lens},
  url = {https://knowthetext.com/question/questions/matthew-19-24/},
  year = {2026},
  note = {Version 1; revised 2026-11-09; Fact-checked}
}

Sources

76 sources from 62 works

1
Matthew 19:25↩^a ↩^b ↩^c ↩^d ↩^e ↩^f
2
Mark 10:26↩^a ↩^b ↩^c ↩^d ↩^e ↩^f
3
Luke 18:26↩^a ↩^b ↩^c ↩^d ↩^e ↩^f
4
Matthew 19:26↩^a ↩^b ↩^c ↩^d ↩^e ↩^f ↩^g ↩^h ↩ⁱ ↩^j
5
Mark 10:27↩^a ↩^b ↩^c ↩^d ↩^e ↩^f ↩^g
6
Luke 18:27↩^a ↩^b ↩^c ↩^d ↩^e ↩^f ↩^g
Agnieszka Ziemińska, “The Origin of the 'Needle's Eye Gate' Myth: Theophylact or Anselm? New Testament Studies 68 (CC BY 4.0)” (2022)
- 7
  p. 359↩^a ↩^b ↩^c ↩^d ↩^e ↩^f ↩^g
- 8
  p. 358 (abstract)↩^a ↩^b ↩^c ↩^d ↩^e ↩^f ↩^g
- 10
  p. 360↩^a ↩^b ↩^c ↩^d ↩^e ↩^f ↩^g ↩^h ↩ⁱ
- 20
  p. 361↩^a ↩^b ↩^c ↩^d ↩^e ↩^f ↩^g ↩^h
- 34
  pp. 359-360↩^a ↩^b ↩^c
9
Checked in this site's verse database: STEPBible TAGNT, 'camel' in Matt 19:24, Mark 10:25, Luke 18:25 with the editions containing it↩^a ↩^b ↩^c ↩^d ↩^e
How this was derived
select count(*) from tokens where std_ref in ('Matt.19.24','Mark.10.25','Luke.18.25') and root_strong='G2574' and editions='NA28+NA27+Tyn+SBL+WH+Treg+TR+Byz'
11
John A. Broadus, Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew (An American Commentary on the New Testament) (1886), p. 408, on Matt 19:24↩^a ↩^b ↩^c ↩^d ↩^e ↩^f ↩^g ↩^h ↩ⁱ ↩^j ↩^k ↩^l ↩^m ↩ⁿ ↩^o ↩^p ↩^q ↩^r ↩^s ↩^t
12
Flavius Josephus (tr. William Whiston, 1737), The Wars of the Jews (Project Gutenberg ebook 2850), Book 5, ch. 4, sect. 2↩^a ↩^b ↩^c
13
Alfred Plummer, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Gospel according to St. Luke (ICC; New York: Scribner) (1914), p. 425, on Luke 18:25↩^a ↩^b ↩^c ↩^d ↩^e
14
Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society, “'Camel', Insight on the Scriptures (jw.org)”, s.v. Camel, Illustrative Use↩^a ↩^b ↩^c ↩^d
15
Cyril of Alexandria (tr. R. Payne Smith), Commentary upon the Gospel according to S. Luke, vol. 2 (Oxford University Press) (1859), Sermon CXXIII, pp. 571-572↩^a ↩^b ↩^c ↩^d ↩^e
John Calvin (tr. William Pringle, Calvin Translation Society), Commentary on a Harmony of the Evangelists, Matthew, Mark, and Luke, vol. 2 (Edinburgh) (1845)
- 16
  p. 401, on Matt 19:23-24↩^a ↩^b ↩^c ↩^d ↩^e ↩^f ↩^g ↩^h
- 53
  p. 401, on Matt 19:23↩^a ↩^b ↩^c ↩^d ↩^e
Theodore R. Lorah Jr., “Again: Camel or Rope in Matthew 19.24 and Mark 10.25? (paper hosted by Thomas F. McDaniel, Palmer Theological Seminary)” (1996)
- 17
  p. 1↩^a ↩^b ↩^c ↩^d
- 30
  p. 5↩^a ↩^b ↩^c
- 41
  p. 2↩^a ↩^b
18
Babylonian Talmud (William Davidson English edition, Sefaria), Berakhot 55b, Berakhot 55b↩^a ↩^b ↩^c ↩^d ↩^e
Babylonian Talmud (William Davidson English edition, Sefaria), Bava Metzia 38b
- 19
  Bava Metzia 38b↩^a ↩^b ↩^c ↩^d ↩^e
- 67
  Bava Metzia 38b, translator's interpolation↩
A. B. Bruce, The Synoptic Gospels, in The Expositor's Greek Testament, vol. 1, ed. W. Robertson Nicoll (1897)
- 21
  on Mark 10:25↩^a ↩^b ↩^c ↩^d
- 28
  on Mark 10:24↩^a ↩^b
- 58
  on Matt 19:24↩^a ↩^b ↩^c
22
John Chrysostom (NPNF series 1, vol. 10), Homily 63 on Matthew (New Advent), Homily 63.2↩^a ↩^b ↩^c ↩^d ↩^e ↩^f
23
John Piper, “How to Get a Camel through a Needle's Eye (sermon, Desiring God)” (2000), sermon of April 30, 2000↩^a ↩^b ↩^c ↩^d
24
John Wesley, “Explanatory Notes upon the New Testament, Matthew (Wesley Center Online)”, on Matt 19:24↩^a ↩^b
25
Lord Nugent (George Nugent-Grenville), Lands, Classical and Sacred, vol. 1, 2nd ed. (London: Charles Knight) (1846), pp. 187-188↩^a ↩^b ↩^c ↩^d ↩^e
26
Checked in this site's verse database: STEPBible TAGNT, editions containing πεποιθότας in Mark 10:24↩^a ↩^b
How this was derived
select editions from tokens where std_ref='Mark.10.24' and word_num=21
27
Checked in this site's verse database: SBLGNT apparatus on Mark 10:24↩^a ↩^b
How this was derived
select raw_entry from apparatus_entries where std_ref='Mark.10.24'
29
John Wesley, “Sermon 108, On Riches (1872 edition, Wesley Center Online)”, section 2↩^a ↩^b ↩^c ↩^d
Clement of Alexandria (tr. William Wilson, ANF vol. 2), Who Is the Rich Man That Shall Be Saved? (New Advent)
- 31
  ch. 14↩^a ↩^b ↩^c ↩^d
- 70
  ch. 5↩
32
Jason Colavito, “On the Gospel of Wealth (blog)” (2012), post of 4 April 2012↩^a ↩^b ↩^c ↩^d ↩^e
Thomas Aquinas (compiler); J. H. Newman (ed.), Catena Aurea: Commentary on the Four Gospels, vol. 1 part 2, St Matthew (Oxford: J. H. Parker) (1841)
- 33
  p. 670, on Matt 19:23-26 ("Gloss")↩^a ↩^b ↩^c ↩^d ↩^e
- 72
  p. 669, on Matt 19:23-26 ("Jerome")↩
35
Candida Moss, “Your Understanding of Eye of the Needle Is Probably Wrong (The Daily Beast)” (2022), opening paragraphs↩^a ↩^b
36
Matthew 19:24↩^a ↩^b ↩^c ↩^d ↩^e ↩^f
37
Mark 10:25↩^a ↩^b ↩^c ↩^d ↩^e ↩^f
38
Luke 18:25↩^a ↩^b ↩^c ↩^d ↩^e ↩^f
39
James A. Patch, 'Needle', in The International Standard Bible Encyclopaedia, vol. 4, ed. James Orr (1915), vol. 4, s.v. Needle↩^a ↩^b
Cameron Buettel, “What Is the Eye of the Needle? (Grace to You blog, reposted on Monergism)” (2015)
- 40
  blog post↩^a ↩^b ↩^c ↩^d ↩^e ↩^f ↩^g
- 75
  blog post, 14 Sept 2015 repost↩
42
Ibn Kathir (abridged English translation, via quran.com API), Tafsir Ibn Kathir on Qur'an 7:40, on 7:40↩^a ↩^b
43
Qur'an (M. A. S. Abdel Haleem translation, via quran.com API), Qur'an 7:40, Surah al-A'raf 7:40↩
44
William Pringle (editor's note), Commentary on a Harmony of the Evangelists, Matthew, Mark, and Luke, vol. 2 (Edinburgh) (1845), p. 402, note↩
45
Qur'an (Saheeh International translation, via quran.com API), Qur'an 7:40, Surah al-A'raf 7:40↩^a ↩^b
46
Checked in this site's verse database: STEPBible TAGNT, the 'eye' and 'needle' words in the three verses↩^a ↩^b
How this was derived
select group_concat(surface, ' ') from (select surface from tokens where std_ref in ('Matt.19.24','Mark.10.25','Luke.18.25') and root_strong in ('G5169','G4476','G5168','G6085','G6011') order by case std_ref when 'Matt.19.24' then 1 when 'Mark.10.25' then 2 else 3 end, word_num)
47
Matthew 19:21↩^a ↩^b ↩^c ↩^d ↩^e
48
Mark 10:21↩^a ↩^b ↩^c ↩^d ↩^e
49
Luke 18:22↩^a ↩^b ↩^c ↩^d ↩^e
50
Matthew 19:23↩^a ↩^b ↩^c ↩^d ↩^e
51
Mark 10:23↩^a ↩^b ↩^c ↩^d ↩^e
52
Luke 18:24↩^a ↩^b ↩^c ↩^d ↩^e
Catholic Church, Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2nd ed. (scborromeo.org transcription) (1997)
- 54
  para. 2544↩^a ↩^b ↩^c
- 74
  para. 2053↩
55
John Wesley, “Sermon 50, The Use of Money (1872 edition, Wesley Center Online)”, section III.1↩^a ↩^b ↩^c
56
Metropolitan Hilarion (Alfeyev), “Christ and the Rich Youth: A Homily on the Twelfth Sunday After Pentecost (Pravmir.com)” (2015), homily of 23 August 2015↩^a ↩^b ↩^c
57
Fr Seraphim Holland, “Sermon on the 12th Sunday after Pentecost: The Rich Young Ruler (OrthoChristian.com)”, sermon text↩^a ↩^b
59
Henry Barclay Swete, The Gospel according to St Mark: The Greek Text with Introduction, Notes and Indices (London: Macmillan) (1898), on Mark 10:25↩^a ↩^b ↩^c
60
Mark Woods, “The camel and the needle: What did Jesus really mean? (Christian Today)” (2015), article of 28 October 2015↩
61
Matthew 19:16↩^a ↩^b ↩^c
62
Mark 10:17↩^a ↩^b ↩^c
63
Luke 18:18↩^a ↩^b ↩^c
64
Mark 10:24↩
65
Matthew 19:20↩
66
Matthew 19:22↩
68
Checked in this site's verse database: English editions of Mark 10:24 without 'trust'↩
How this was derived
select group_concat(work_id) from verses where std_ref='Mark.10.24' and work_id in ('kjv','asv','web','bsb','ylt','darby','drc','geneva1599','lsv') and text not like '%trust%'
69
Checked in this site's verse database: BSB footnote on Mark 10:24↩
How this was derived
select n.body from verse_notes n join verses v on v.id=n.verse_id where v.std_ref='Mark.10.24' and v.work_id='bsb' and n.kind='footnote'
71
Łukasz Koszałka, “On Whether the Rich Can Be Saved: Clement of Alexandria and Gnostic Conceptions of Wealth, Vox Patrum 99” (2026), p. 345 (abstract)↩
73
Isaiah 60:6↩
76
Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society, “'Needle's Eye', Insight on the Scriptures (jw.org)”, s.v. Needle's Eye↩

What should we answer next?

Pick the question you'd most like us to research. One vote each; you can change it until the round closes.

We alternate: the page with the most reader votes, then the page with the most gifts.

Next pick: by reader votes

Votes choose what we research next; they never decide the answer.

Gifts are counted separately →

Suggest a question

The evidence

A Jerusalem gate called the needle's eye existed in Jesus' time

The Greek text of the saying has camel (κάμηλον), not the rope word (κάμιλον)

The camel saying adapts a proverb already current in Jesus' day

God makes possible the salvation of the rich that people cannot achieve

What people get wrong

Hard questions

Was there a gate called the needle's eye, and where does the idea come from?

The strongest case

Strongest responses

Plain assessment

Does 'camel' really mean a rope or ship's cable?

The strongest case

Strongest responses

Plain assessment

Do the Talmud's elephant sayings show where the image came from?

The strongest case

Strongest responses

Plain assessment

Does the saying condemn wealth itself?

The strongest case

Strongest responses

Plain assessment

Do the gate and rope explanations soften the saying?

The strongest case

Strongest responses

Plain assessment

What the texts say

Background

The encounter behind the saying Text

The gate story's traceable history Scholarship

Later names, and what they can show Evidence

The Talmud's elephant and the needle Tradition

Camel or rope in the Qur'an Tradition

What the prosperity reports can and cannot show Scholarship

Where translations differ

Mark 10:25 · Luke 18:25 · “Camel or cable” κάμηλον / κάμιλον

Mark 10:25 · Luke 18:25 · “The needle and its eye” τρυπήματος ῥαφίδος / τρυμαλιᾶς ῥαφίδος / τρήματος βελόνης

Mark 10:24 · “Trusting in riches”

How it has been interpreted

Early church: Greek · Clement of Alexandria — wealth as an instrument

Early church: Greek · John Chrysostom — the highest degree of impossibility

Early church: Latin · Jerome — hard, not impossible, and the camels of Midian

Early church: Greek · Cyril of Alexandria — a sailor's cable

Catholic · The Catechism — detachment required of all

Orthodox · Theophylact, Metropolitan Hilarion and Fr Seraphim Holland

Protestant: Reformed · Calvin and Piper — rope, danger and effectual grace

Protestant: Methodist · John Wesley — humanly impossible

Protestant: evangelical · Cameron Buettel — the context requires impossibility

Jehovah's Witnesses · Insight on the Scriptures — a literal needle

Academic (critical) · Agnieszka Ziemińska — the radical image

Skeptic/secular · Jason Colavito — a story for the rich

Where else the Bible mentions it

Test your understanding

What follows the camel comparison in all three accounts?

What is the earliest gate mention Ziemińska identifies?

What do the two Talmud elephant passages discuss?

Keep going

The rich young man Coming

Plain citation

Chicago-style note

BibTeX

Sources

What should we answer next?

Report a problem