At some point in my youth, I attempted to read William Faulkner’s Light in August. I gave up almost immediately. I wasn’t getting it, and was certain I wouldn’t. A decade ago, I tried again. I say without reservation that Light in August is the Great American Novel.

     At times, it takes time to see things that have been right before your eyes the whole time. So it is with a collection of books I’ve been revisiting since childhood, books filled with superheroes and villains, clashing armies, beautiful women for whom kings killed, visitors from other worlds, and everyday people engaged in acts of selflessness or selfishness. Over the years, I have been continuously amazed by the things that have jumped out at me that I had never noticed before. The collection, of course, is the Bible, and my favorite book out of the bunch is John. Recently, it has come to mind often. I keep thinking it might be helpful for some people to go back and read it again.

      Those “people” include Mike Huckabee, the former pastor, Arkansas governor, and candidate for the Republican nomination for president who tweeted “Jesus wept,” in reaction to the Supreme Court rulings on marriage equality a few days ago. Mr. Huckabee obviously knows something about the book, since his tweet comes directly from it, but he might be surprised by what a few other passages could tell him about the man he cites.

 (First, a few warnings. A friend has said my posts are too long, so I’m going to warn you that now might be a good time to bail since this one might go a bit longer. I also want to warn those who identify with Mr. Huckabee’s sentiments that this might be one to skip for fear of developing a severe case of apoplexy. My final warning is that I find it helpful sometimes to discuss the sacred in a most profane manner. Duly warned? Okay.)

     I don’t know what edition of the Bible Mr. Huckabee reads (more on that later), but most of the ones I’ve read say almost the same thing about the same things. After years of reading and re-reading John, it seems obvious to me Jesus wouldn’t weep over marriage equality – given his own same-sex relationship. Yes, despite the DaVinci Code, novelist Dan Brown’s famous fantasy about Jesus and Mary Magdalene, John states explicitly that Jesus loved a man (loved, not knew). You wouldn’t know this from reading any of the other three approved books about Jesus, but the man Jesus loved – in sharing his tale with the author of the fourth book – wanted to make sure we knew.

      I don’t remember the first time he caught my attention, but catch it he did. I just remember wondering why the author felt it necessary to point out, repeatedly, that Jesus – the greatest lover of all time, the man who loved everyone to the point of dying for everyone – loved this man in particular. It was as if the author wanted to hammer that point into his readers’ heads, as if he knew that simply telling us the man’s name would not achieve the intended effect, would not make us understand. So, instead, every time he is written about, we are forced to read the words “the disciple whom Jesus loved”. After awhile, even the most obtuse reader might begin to think he was more than just the teacher’s pet.

      The first mention of him occurs right after Jesus announces he is going to be betrayed. Instead of Peter asking him directly who the dastardly bastard is, he asks Jesus’ guy to ask him. That was an attention grabber, making me think “Hold up, wait a minute. What the fuck is that about?” I mean, we’re talking about Peter! Peter has to ask someone to ask Jesus something?

     Come on now, you do know who Peter was, don’t you? Peter was Jesus’ right-hand man, his main man, his mans, his boy, his ace boon coon, his nigga. Peter was the type of muthafucka who not only would cut a muthafucka for Jesus, he did cut a muthafucka for Jesus. Apparently, Peter knew enough to know Jesus wouldn’t tell him who the culprit was (lest Judas not survive the night) but would tell his guy. When asked, Jesus does tell his guy, but the guy is wise enough to not tell Peter.

     The second mention of the man Jesus loved happens when the author is recounting the Crucifixion. Jesus’ guy is the only one of his male followers who had the courage to show up. Some of Jesus’ female followers were there, but nary another man. When Jesus sees his mother and his guy standing next to each other, he tells his mother that his guy is now her son, and he tells his guy that Mary is now his mother. The author goes on to say that, from that point, Jesus’ guy took Mary into his home. Imagine, Jesus creates an alternative family – from the Cross.

     Readers next encounter the Beloved Disciple when Mary Magdalene tells him and Peter she has just found Jesus’ tomb empty. The author tells us that Jesus’ guy and Peter make a mad dash for the tomb. Once again, the author feels a need to remind us of the specialness of this guy by letting us know he outruns Peter and gets there first, although he can only bring himself to look in rather than go in.

     The Beloved Disciple is mentioned a fourth time when he and his fellow disciples have gone fishing without any luck. Jesus shows up and provides them with almost more luck than they can handle. Jesus goes unrecognized by all of them except guess who.

     The last words about this man Jesus loved are found in five of the last six verses of the book. Peter makes the mistake of questioning this man’s very presence, asking Jesus “Lord, what about him?” Jesus is not pleased, and lets Peter know it. I’ll quote Jesus’ response verbatim, then offer my translation.

Jesus: “If it is my will that he remain until I come, what is that to you? Follow me!”

Translation: “Nigga please, I know you didn’t just ask me some shit like that. What the  fuck you mean ‘What about him?’ If I want this man to stay here ‘ til I get back, what the fuck that got to do with you? You just do what the fuck I tell you to!”

Not only does the author show Jesus putting Peter in his place, in the very next passage he repeats it.

     Now, please don’t just take my word about all of this. Read the book again (or the first time) yourself. It doesn’t matter whether you believe you’re reading the work of a biographer or a novelist, there’s something there for you. Just make sure you find a reputable edition, which brings me back to not knowing what edition Mr. Huckabee has been reading. When I first started paying attention to this storyline in the book sometime in the late ’70’s or early ’80’s, I became curious to see if it was told the same from edition to edition. Believe it or not, I once found one that leaves the story of the Beloved Disciple completely out of John. I could hardly believe my eyes, but they weren’t playing tricks on me; he wasn’t there. To this day, I regret never having written down the name of the publishing company with editors so unnerved by the implications of that part of the story that they took the Beloved Disciple out of it completely. Maybe Mr. Huckabee has been privy to only that edition. Too bad. He needs to know why Jesus wept.