[MrEdd]

So your point as you have posted it relies in its entirety on the notion that there were no needles before steel needles.

Deconstructing the argument, there is nothing left if wood, bone, bronze, silver, or copper needles were in use in ancient times.

I submit that the thesis is lacking in depth and internal consistency.

[CurlyDave]

I first found this explanation in "Asimov's Guide to the Bible: Two Volumes in One, the Old and New Testaments" Which even had a photograph of a modern camel and a needle's eye on a road. It is out of print now, but used copies can be had for a modest cost on Amazon.

So your point as you have posted it relies in its entirety on the notion that there were no needles before steel needles.

I appoligize for leaving that impression. I am familiar with the wood, bone, bronze, silver, and copper needles that were in use in ancient times. If you examine these needles very few of them had a closed eye like modern needles. They all have very large eyes, compared to a modern steel needle.

I am still convinced the "the eye of a needle" was a figure of speech in biblical times, where it was possible for a camel to pass through the narrowing, but difficult.

This interpretation is also much easier to reconcile with the parable of the talents than an interpretation where it is difficult in the extreme to pass through the eye of a needle.

Remember, in the parable of the talents, increasing one's wealth by investing and trading was portrayed as a virtue, not as a bar to entering heaven.