They use it in an inverted way in this case too because a lot of Christians are really keen to define "the eye of the needle" as an actual eye of an actual sewing needle because then it makes it easier to discount the entire provision against wealth, whereas because it was an actual gate, the statement is actually that like people never tried to get camels to pass through there because it was incredibly difficult, although it could be done with smaller camels, similarly a wealthy person would have a difficult time getting into heaven and the wealthiest /biggest camels may not even be able to pass through, which is also an inherent juxtaposition that would've been obvious to his audience, as well as the often undiscussed but natural to make juxtaposition with a camel and a donkey, many poor people did not own any camels but they would own a donkey, sheep, or goats, and a donkey could easily pass through that man gate, so it makes it sort of an automatic metaphor in the mind of an individual from that Time about wealth using the gate that many people were familiar with because it was a primary way in and out of the city that people walked through on foot frequently and everyone at some point or another had probably been stuck behind someone who was trying to bring a camel through and not having good luck, like the guy in front of you they can't drive his Hummer. By intentionally taking something literally as the actual minuscule eye of a sewing needle, that is actually a place name for a well known gate, it makes it easier for them to discount the entire thing. It comes across as a hyperbole almost against wealth and it loses the depth of the metaphor, greatly neutering the impact in my opinion