Bob's question at the end of the Be God's Helper post is a good one: why bother with Jesus? Why bother learning the language of Christianity, the tongue of Jesus? I think this may be the most important question that western Christianity will ask itself in the 21st century (if it has the cohones/Hoden/ testicoli/睾丸 to ask it), and the answer may ultimately be either the life or death of a 2000 year old religion.

Why be God's helper in a Christian perspective? Why not be God's helper as a Buddhist or a Hindu or a Jew or a Muslim or a Wiccan or a Universalist or a Humanist or a One-Universe Christian or an Athiest (in no particular order, mind you)? For me, I resonate with Marcus Borg's response in "The Heart of Christianity: Rediscovering a Life of Faith" (2003 HarperSanFrancisco). Borg asks "So why be a Christian?" and offers these reasons:
1. it is important to be a part of a religious community and tradition of practice
2. We need a path. We are lost without one.
3. Relgious community and tradition put us in touch with the wisdom and beauty of the past. They are communities of memory.
4. The path of Jesus has incubated lives remarkably filled with compassion, courage, and joy.

and
5. the Christian tradition, the "tongue of Jesus" is "home" for me.

When a Christian seeker asked the Dalai Lama whether she should become a Buddhist, his response was: "No, become more deeply Christian; live more deeply into your own tradition." I think that can be said of all who seek to be God's helpers in their own religious language and tongue.

I could say more, but I'll stop and encourage your responses.

Email: randy118@comcast.net

Thanks Randy for the comments. The Dali Lama put it well, and I like your phrase, being God’s helper in a Christian perspective.

I’m not sure, at our current levels of helping, that a more expansive word is needed? Maybe if we get to the point where we “sell all that we have and give it to the poor” we would qualify for more than simple helping. Bob raises a challenging point though, is there something “more” about Christian helping? Well, maybe there is, and maybe there’s also something more about Buddhist helping. And maybe there’s really something extraordinary about just simple everyday helping, without the benefit of Jesus as a model.

Marion and Bob, we went through this discussion quite thoroughly when we started Be God’s Helper. Many of us felt as you do that helper was lacking something. We wanted more of a love word. But as we started using David’s materials and teaching Helping to our kids and sharing time during our worship service, the word’s stood up well. It actually takes a little humility and repentance of pride to settle for such a humble word. And, as I’ve already said, considering that we are the most privileged people ever to live on the planet, being God’s Helpers is probably more than adequate to describe our sacrifices.

Randy and Eugene, your two posts together make two rather effective "bridge posts" connecting helping in the the most generic sense and helping in the Chnristian context, which is precisely the bridge I have been seeking. I know how thoughtful your search for just the right--and simple--word has been. Randy has reminded me of those points Borg made in his wonderful book. The Dalai Lama re-echoed a point Jung used to make about those who are tempted to abanedon their own traditions when in thrall to the fascination of the "other." "Going native" as in Conrad's "Heart of Darkness," and in violation of one's membership in his cultural collective, only leads to alination and tragedy.

Perhaps my musings are wandering a bit far afield here, but perhaps not. Following the advice of the Dalai Lama, I have to live more deeply into my two universe spirit world, rather than artificially try to travel that "other" path of my new Mennonite friends in this forum. As Borg points out, being a two universe Chritian is no impediment to being helpful, and in so many instances it is apositive inspiration to helpfulness.

Email: rclarsen@otponline.net

I do really love this discussion--- the sensitivity, intelligence, and the courage of it!!! Thank you all for being so honest and interesting to share with!!!

Before seeing this subject, I entered a comment under David Ryan's latest post. I suggested that maybe the word "co-creator" with God ( or with the Earth) might be a good replacement for the word," Helper".

Then I read this week's Bible lessons, which seem to reinforce the use of "co-creator". These lessons are so strong. We see God as creator. We see in the psalms how eyes of faith look at God's creation. Seeing the Eternal One's Glory. We see how the new Christian community of faith is filled with the inspiration of God's creative spirit in the speaking of tongues. Lastly, we see the powerful commisioning of Jesus at his baptism to begin the work of the Messiah, the inaugurator of God's Imperial Rule on Earth. See how all these lessons look at the creativity through the perspective and actions of faith---imagining God's creativity.

Creativity needs a context. That's why I agree with Borg, Randy, Eugene, and Bob. Why not take the religious roots, culture and community we have been born into and use THAT as our context? Why migrate to another, if we don't need to?

Ofcourse, our Christian co creation best focuses on helpfulness. That's where this word fits in nicely. But, the word 'co-creation' patterns itself so well on Jesus' work to bring God's Imperial Rule to earth. ANd it involves a passion, a dedication that maybe the word "helper" doesn't. I know you all have been creative in your lives. When you were being do, did you not feel fully alive, passionate, loving of what you were doing? I know I always have.

Also, Christian 'co-creation' is different from other kinds of creation,because it has Christ's life and work as its source and its goal. This distingues it from other kinds of 'helpfulness". Also, for us sacramentalists, this kind of creativity contines to incarnate God's first creative impulse.

Thank you for letting me join in discussions which I'm sure you already have had. Thank you for your patience in rehashing what you have probably already been through. I am looking forward to hearing people's response.

Email: mhlandlbl@msn.com

I am still musing about this "God's helper" notion. Eugene suggests that we ask, not the questiion "have you been loved today?" but rather, according to him the more easily answered question, "have you been helped today?" I admit that one can sit like a lump and say very passivly, "I love gay people," and then not lift a finger to actually "help" them. I suppose that this is Eugene's way of saying that it is by their fruits that they shall be known. Get off you butt and do something; deeds count more than mere empty words.

But behind every helpful deed (human behavior being purposeful or we would not do anything at all), behind every helpful action is there not the original motivation of love? Doesn't love precede helpfulness? Why, then, is love not the operative word in this forum? When people contributing to this formum say that God is to be found in helpfulness, I am brought back to the earlier and even simpler notion that God is love. But love that acts, I hasten to add. Love the verb and not merely the noun.

Email: rclarsen@otponline.net