Page 1 of 3

The Camel and the Eye of the Needle

Mark 10:23-27
And having looked around, Jesus said to the disciples How difficult for those with riches to enter the
Kingdom of God. The disciples were amazed at his words. But Jesus again said How difficult it is to
enter the Kingdom of God. It is easier to thread a camel through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to
enter the Kingdom of God.
They were even more amazed, asking each other Then who has the ability to save themselves? Having
watched this, Jesus said Men lack the ability, but not God. For God has the ability to do all things.
tr. mine.

Photo: http://www.micreon.de/ A carving made by a femtosecond laser to promote the micro-component manufacturer Micreon.
Also check out their website for a pair of glasses made for a fly.
One of the most inconvenient passages in the NT for Western Christians. The average US household
income puts the average US householder in the top 10% of the richest people worldwide. Here in the UK
were not far behind. If you are reading this on your own computer, in your own home, youre one of the
richest people in the world.
This passage follows the story of the rich young man, who comes to Jesus to ask what he might do to
inherit eternal life. Jesus tells him to keep the law: the young man says he has; Jesus then tells him to sell
everything he has and give it to the poor, then come and join him. The man goes away saddened, because
he has many possessions.
There have been lots of attempts over the years to tone down this passage. Like most inconvenient
passages in the bible it has been either ignored or neutered. In this case there are a bunch of approaches
one can take to neutering it. Please suggest others.
1. The eye of the needle was a gate in Jerusalem. Camels that tried to enter that gate would have to have
crawl through on their knees. Therefore it isnt impossible for a rich person to enter the Kingdom, they
just have to do so on their knees This is a later invention with no historic or archaeological evidence.
And makes no sense.
Page 2 of 3

2. The camel was a particular type of fishermans knot. Therefore it isnt impossible for a rich person to
enter, they just need to untangle their lives first Again this just plain bad historical scholarship.
3. [See Edit message below] The camel is a mistranslation of the Greek word for rope. The original story
talked about a rope passing through the eye of the needle This doesnt change the meaning much,
although it perhaps softens it a bit. But it does seem designed to make Jesus less zany and hyperbolic.
Unfortunately it is also false, the only Greek texts we have with rope are a thousand years too late for it
to be original.
4. Jesus is responding to the arrogance of the rich young man in the previous section. The rich young man
claimed to keep the law, but clearly he must have been lying, because nobody can really keep the law.
Therefore what Jesus is saying here is rich people are often arrogant, and it is arrogant people who dont
get to enter the Kingdom. Therefore if youre rich, be humble and you can receive the Kingdom. This is
just completely made up. The rich young ruler comes and bows at Jesuss feet, theres no indication he is
arrogant from the text: he is portrayed as being eager to learn. In fact if anyone can be said to have
knocked at the door in this passage, it is him. Unfortunately it is shut in his face. There are other
interpretations of the story of the rich young man, but I dont want to get caught up in the previous story
though this is about the camel and the needle. We can return to that story in another post.
5. Jesus is making the point that a rich person cannot enter the Kingdom in their own power, but must
rely on God This is perhaps the best approach Ive heard, but I dont find it particularly convincing.
Most translations mush the two parts of the story together (Ive separated them, above). Jesuss response
to the rich young man is to send him off depressed Jesus makes no attempt to introduce him to Gods
salvation. Then in the first bit of our passage, there are no verbs of agency. It doesnt say it is more
difficult for a camel to be threaded through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to be able to enter. The
verb to be able only comes in the disciples question: who is able to save themselves? To which Jesus
answers that only God has that ability. Jesus is here responding to the disciples question, not to the
previous statement; and specifically he is responding to the introduction of the verb this verb
of ability, of possibility, and of action, from which we get our word dynamic. Ive translated the passage
with ability to show how this verb comes in, and it is this verb that Jesus then uses back in his response,
twice. It is normally translated possible in this passage, which is fine, but the verb carries the meaning of
action. We might say it is possible that the stock market will fall this year, but that wouldnt be .
So I translate who is able to save themselves rather than the more traditional who can be saved, to
reflect this active sense in the Greek.
6. [See Edit message below] The hyperbole has a traditional answer. The camel goes through the eye if
you first ground it up into powder. The difficulty (again note, it is not impossible) is to get the camel
ground up. And doing so will obviously destroy it. Thus Jesus is making the point that you have to lose
your life to gain it: only that which is willing to be destroyed can be used by God. I cant find a pedigree
for this interpretation, but again (as in the gate example) it has the effect of softening the starkness of the
statement, and providing a recipe for making progress.
Page 3 of 3

So I think this passage isnt simply ignorable. Jesus doesnt appear to be saying that rich folks who trust
God are okay, because God is able to save them. If so, why send the rich young man away depressed? Why
does he only talk about Gods ability to save after overhearing the disciples discussing ability among
themselves? Why not make that comment earlier, when it could have been solace to the rich young man?
For this passage and others, it seems fairly clear to me that Jesus taught a theology of poverty: a kingdom
of God among the poor, in which the rich were not present.
How do you understand this passage? If you are a Christian who thinks that this is an authentic teaching
of Jesus, how do you reconcile this with your myriad possessions? If you are not a Christian, do you think
that this passage shows that Jesus was fundamentally anti-rich, or was it just a joke?

On a completely separate note, there are a couple of interesting little features in this passage that
normally slip by unnoticed. First notice that Jesus looks around at the start hes just sent the rich young
ruler away, and now seems to look around to check hes not being overheard. Second notice the join
between the two parts the disciples ask each other about salvation, and Jesus watches this for a while
before interjecting. Two little character notes that give glimpses into how Mark sees the dynamics of the
group.