As Jesus the son of Mary and John the Son of Zachariah were walking, they saw a wild goat calving. Jesus said to John, "Say these words: 'Hannah begat John and mary begat Jesus. The earth calls you, child. Come out, child'" Any woman in labor to whom thse words are spoken will staightway deliver, by God's leave. John was the first to believe in Jesus and trust him. They were cousins, sons of maternal auts, John being six months older than Jesus. Then John was killed before Jesus was raised to heaven. (Hayat al-Hayawan al-Kubra, Kamal al-Din al-Damiri)

In the gospel of Luke, John is a great prophet but he is "not worthy to untie the thong of Jesus' sandel." The relationship between John and Jesus is clearly important, but there are deep ambiguities.

In Mandaean scripture John is a great prophet and Jesus is his gifted, yet troublesome student. The relationship is important, even dialectical, but fraught.

John is much more prominent in the history of Flavius Josephus than is Jesus. Most scholars argue the mentions of Jesus are accretions of Christian editing. What Josephus tells us of John is coherent with the gospels and Mandaean scripture.

Islamic scripture and tradition embrace John as the closest companion of Jesus. It is John who challenges, engages, and corrects as would a best friend, a life-long friend.

The stories of John tell us more of Jesus than of the Christ. But if there is any truth to the parallel traditions the Christological implications could be compelling. While I am intellectually prepared to accept that Jesus was fully human and fully God, I am sure my relationship with the divine is mostly an encounter with the fully human Jesus.

On Monday, August 31 I started a new blog at http://didymus-desertfathers.blogspot.com/ Please join me there.

It is reported that John and Jesus were walking in the marketplace. A woman bumped into them and John said, "As God is my witness, I did not feel it." Jesus said, "God be praised! Your body is with me, but where is your heart?" John answered, "Cousin, if my heart were to feel secure about anything other than God for the twinkling of any eye, I would think I had not known God." (Mukashfat al-Qulub, Abu Hamid al-Ghazali)

When I was reading the Mandaean accounts of John, I did not reproduce here everything those scriptures have John saying. That was a difficult choice to make.

But in many cases I perceived John was simply serving as a mouthpiece for Gnostic mumbo-jumbo. I am sympathetic to many Gnostic notions, but I have concluded they too often lapse into advocacy of self-reliance and self-glorification.

There is a mystical reality. There is great value when body and mind are wholly with God. But when walking with Jesus - or any other - in the marketplace, I perceive there is also great value in being fully present in that place with that person.

Jesus said to John the son of Zachariah, "If a man makes mention of you and speaks the truth, give thanks to God. If he is lying, multiply your thanks, for God will increase the register of your good deeds without exertion from you." (al-Tibr-al-Masbuk, Abn Hamid al-Ghazali)

To suffer unjustly -- and to do so with integrity, courage, and love -- is honored in all of the Abrahamic faiths.

In a 1964 interview Ayn Rand rejected this shared ethic.

Christ, in terms of the Christian philosophy, is the human ideal. He personifies that which men should strive to emulate. Yet, according to the Christian mythology, he died on the cross not for his own sins but for the sins of the nonideal people. In other words, a man of perfect virtue was sacrificed for men who are vicious and who are expected or supposed to accept that sacrifice. If I were a Christian, nothing could make me more indignant than that: the notion of sacrificing the ideal to the nonideal, or virtue to vice. And it is in the name of that symbol that men are asked to sacrifice themselves for their inferiors. That is precisely how the symbolism is used.

Rand is right. And she is terribly wrong. She has accurately summarized the action and the symbolism. She utterly failed to perceive the power of self-sacrifice.

In Judaism we see, again and again the redemptive possibilities of struggling with our fate, wrestling with our God.

In Islam we can experience the blessings of submission, the bliss of giving over to God all our struggles.

In Christianity we are called to self-sacrifice by which our fractured condition is healed, made whole, and may find its potential and purpose.

The three faiths have each tended to specialize. I wonder if we might not be missing the synergy of struggle, submission, and self-sacrifice?

John the son of Zachariah met Jesus the son of Mary, John smiling of face and welcoming while Jesus was frowning and gloomy. Jesus said to John, "You smile as if you feel secure." John said to Jesus, "You frown as if you are in despair." God revealed, "What John does is dearer to us. (Kitab al-Ikwan, Abu Bar ibn al-Dunya)

Based on my prior understanding of their ministries, I would expect Jesus to be smiling and John to be frowning.

I speculate - I don't really know enough to theorize - that the Islamic tradition gives us a glimpse of the competition between the followers of John and Jesus in the centuries after their death.

By the time of Mohammed (late Sixth Century into the early Seventh Century) the Assyrian Church was undergoing monastic reforms emphasizing strict asceticism. The reforms were based on their understanding of the model established by John the Baptist.

At the same time the Mandaean followers of John, more numerous and prominent than today, rejected asceticism as heretical. Their baptism had removed the need for fasting, giving cause for celebration.

In any case, the spiritual lesson seems to me correct. We should smile much more than frown. We are to approach life with confidence in God's love and grace.

A man who had committed adultery was brought to Jesus, who ordered them to stone him. Jesus said, "But no one should stone him who has committed what he has committed." They let the stones fall from their hands, all except John the son of Zachariah. (al-Zuhd, Ahmad ibn-Hanbal)

I love the listening-game of history.

Only the gospel of John tells of the story echoed above. There it is a woman caught in adultery. There the son of Zachariah is not mentioned. (John 8:1-11)

But the interplay of law, self-criticism, and mercy is the same.

In the gospel version of the story, the accusers seem to slink away while Jesus is looking down. When he looks up, they have all gone.

"Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?" She said, "No one, sir." And Jesus said, ‘Neither do I condemn you. Go your way, and from now on do not sin again."

Neither should we condemn one another.

John and Jesus met and John said, "Ask God's forgiveness for me, for you are better than me." Jesus replied: "You are better than me. I pronounced peace upon myself, whereas God pronounced peace upon you." God recognized the merit of them both. (al-Zuhd, Ahmad ibn-Hanbal)

This is almost certainly a reference to Quran 19 where Jesus explains, "I am a servant of God. He has given me the scripture, and has appointed me a prophet. He made me blessed wherever I go, and enjoined me to observe the Contact Prayers (Salat) and the obligatory charity (Zakat) for as long as I live. I am to honor my mother; He did not make me a disobedient rebel. And peace be upon me the day I was born, the day I die, and the day I shall be raised up."

To our ears there is something over-done and false in this exchange of humilities. We might even hear a competition in self-deprecation. It also offers a portrait of Jesus, and his relationship with John, that is at odds with that of the gospels.

We are not a culture that cultivates humility. Quiet confidence, yes. Walking softly (but carrying a big stick), is respected. John Wayne was not a show-off. But was he humble?

I felt nothing but the revulsion Dickens intended when Mrs. Heep tells David Copperfield, "Umble we are, umble we have been, umble we shall ever be." Clearly it is a false humility, even a prideful humility. This is the caricature of humility that we disdain, without giving much thought to a reality behind the cartoon.

But in approaching and being in relationship with God, which might be more efficacious: confidence or humility?

Jesus met John and said to him, "Admonish me." He said, "Avoid feeling anger." He said, "This I cannot do." He said, " Do not own any wealth." He said, "as for this - it is possible." (al-Zuhd, Ahmad ibn Hanbal)

We do not avoid feeling: anger, fear, envy, lust, and more. We can discipline our perceiving and thinking to be less intense in our feeling, but these are human emotions. To be human is to have such feelings.

We can, however, choose our behavior. We may feel avarice, but we can avoid wealth. We may feel anger, but avoid wrath. Because we are human, we are capable of choosing what we will do with feeling.

Some commentators have suggested the inability of Jesus to control his anger is a failing. For me, it is proof of his full humanity. Recognizing the difference between feeling and behavior is proof of his wisdom.