Comment by Keith Saylor on 2nd mo. 8, 2017 at 1:21pm

Okay that's fair enough. Before I begin I thought Id share a link to a blog post I made over one year ago here on QuakerQuaker. It addresses much of what we've already discussed.

http://www.quakerquaker.org/profiles/blogs/hyper-individualism-and-...

Thank you for the opportunity to further example the witness behind the testimony of "the power of the appearance of the inshining Light onto...my conscience..."

You probably note the use of the words "conscious" and "conscience." Many of the early and founding Quakers refer often, in their writings, to the Conscience as the Throne of God or the seat of the spirit of Christ is in their Conscience or the Light shining in their Conscience. Their can be little doubt that these testimonies to their witness (experience) is one of something happening at the level of their conscience wherein a new entity, if you will, is discovered that changes the nature of their conscience. Now, with that said, it is significant to understand that, in the 17th century, the word conscience carried in it the dual meaning of a moral component (conscience) and an awareness component (conscious, consciousness, or self-consciousness). I discuss this further here on QuakerQuaker:

http://www.quakerquaker.org/profiles/blogs/conscience-conscious-con...

An understanding of the rich and multilayered meaning built into the use of the word Conscience in the 17th century adds a whole new layer to the experience of reading the early Quakers. I use both conscious and conscience together to bring into full relief the nature of the early Quaker experience and others even today.

Something happens not only to the conscience but also the conscious. An awareness is discovered of a new conscious that it is not anchored in (or lit up by) relationship with outward forms and institutions. Literally, an awareness happens wherein a life or way of being is experience that is not of the nature of reflection unto outward forms or the workings of the body. Literally, the conscious and conscience are on a footing wherein they experience an independence from the bodily nature. That is, they experience awareness or consciousness that sustains even upon the death of the body. Meaning, this new way of awareness, knows consciousness even upon the lose of brain function (thought), heart function(feeling and will), eye function(perception of outward objects), ear function, touch function(sensation), nose function(smell), and tongue function(taste). To press forward even further, imagine being without thoughts, feelings, desires, perceptions, sensations, tastes, smells, sounds, etc. What is left? To a person who conscious is anchored in the outward form and function of the body, that is, to a person who no longer has these mirrors of outward bodily thoughts, feelings, desires, perceptions, etc. to see themselves in the lose of the body (or functions of the body) is the loss of consciousness. The fear of death is the fear of the lose of consciousness. However, there is different way wherein the conscious and conscience are no longer established in relation to the outward forms and functions of the body and their outward fashionings ... the inshining or inward Light.

To speak generically, the Light is the entity that approaches the self-conscious ego and enters into unity with it; so that the conscious literally "sees" itself in relation inherent or immanent or self-sustaining being. The conscious comes into relationship and participation with immanent, self-sustained being itself in itself and takes up habitation in it. I AM exists without reflection through the bodily or worldly nature. The immanent experience of being or awareness is one of an "inshining." It is an impulse that reaches into and establishes itself upon the conscious in a different way that is no longer of the nature of reflective thought. It is experienced direct and immediately without reference to or regard for outwardly established forms.

"By the power of the appearance of the inshining Light itself in itself onto my conscious and conscience I tolerate both sides and I am edified by the results

The appearance of immanent (self-sustained awareness) being itself in itself onto my conscious and conscienceis another way of saying The appearance of the inshining Light onto my conscious and conscience.

The expression of "by the power of the appearance" in the context of the NWYM and NCYM is to say that the experience of the inshining Light onto my conscious and conscience discovers to me faith in the power of the immanent Presence itself in itself to rule over and guide those who have taken up membership in NWYM and NCYM and not take upon myself the prerogative (by making outward private judgments) of the inshining Light itself in itself to manage or guide the relationships in those yearly Meetings. A conscious anchored in and a conscience informed by direct and immanent Presence itself in itself brings about a self-conscious ego that is free from connection and identification with outward political and religious ideological constructs and the institutions that support them; and discovers a different way wherein the self-conscious ego takes up habitation in an abiding faith in that immanent Presence, which we all share according to our own measure, and which does not second guess the prerogative of shared immanent Presence itself in itself to government those whose self-conscious ego participates in and unites with it even in disunity.

I hope this gives a better sense of my meaning. However, please feel free to push me further. I welcome these discussions.

Please forgive any spelling or syntax errors. I did not have much time to write this and so merely abided in the Light itself while writing with the hope that it will come out legible. I just do not have the time to edit.

Comment by Daniel Wilcox on 2nd mo. 8, 2017 at 6:35pm

Thanks for more information. I've read the previous blogs, too.

The question is, though, as I asked before: How does such a statement, experience, reality as "By the power of the appearance of the inshining Light itself in itself onto my conscious and conscience..."

relate to ethics in the real world?

You wrote, "I tolerate both sides and I am edified by the results."

I suppose that is somewhat similar to  the early Quakers who both avidly  killed and opposed kill for God,
both strongly supported and enslaved other humans beings, etc.
and supported the abolition of slavery as an inherent evil, one of the worst.

HOWEVER this appears to be contradictory then of the " the inshining Light."

How can enslavement of other humans (most Quakers for at least 130 year)s versus that slavery is inherently evil (Lucretia Mott, Levi Coffin, John Woolman, etc.)

be true in the Light?!

How can Friends being spiritually guided to avidly kill in war other humans for God--often neighbors and relatives--in the English Civil War

versus

refusing to kill, stating that because of God, "we cannot learn war anymore," etc.

How can...insert other ethical oughts--

the one on sexuality in NWYM and NCYM, the one on abortion, the one on euthanasia, the one on the enviornment, etc.

If Friends hold ethically contradictory ethical oughts, what sense does that make?

Do you see where I am completely confused by your view?

Comment by Keith Saylor on 2nd mo. 9, 2017 at 12:53pm

---

Hello Daniel,

For the sake of clarity. By the power of the appearance of the inshining Light onto my conscious and conscience I am come out of participation in and association with the establishment of outward institutional forms (that is, monthly, quarterly, yearly, Meetings or any outward ecclesiastical forms) for worship. I am come out of the establishment of set times and places for worship and the establishment of outwardly codified faiths and practices. The inshining Light has discovered to me a different way and in this way it is mine to recommend the laying down or discarding of all outward forms and practices relating to the conscience and relationships between human beings and embracing the inward rule of the spirit of Christ as sufficient itself in itself to rule and govern human being.

As I am more and more come into the Light, the less I am guided by outward forms like ethical standards and codes. The relative experience of, and participation in, the increase, decrease, and stasis of the spiritual illumination of the inshining Light in the conscious and conscience is my guide.

For example, In the Light I do not refrain from killing or attack someone without outward weapons because of an outward prescriptions, ethical standard, value, or testimony against it. I refrain because the Light itself dims in an activity. I experienced this dimming personal some years back when I came upon a man beating a woman in their front yard. In the Light I took a relatively passive posture of placing myself between the man and the women; hoping it would give her space to leave. The man stuck me and slammed me against a tree. This manifested no small amount of anger on the frontier of my soul and set out to engage him physically with my fists. As I moved forward toward him, their was a pause in my mind (this all happened very quickly in real time), and I experienced the Light's participation with me significantly dim. I had a choice. I knew the Light would not stay in participation with me if I progressed. I made the choice to give break from participation in the Light and yield to outward anger. I learned I literally cannot attack another person physically and participate in the Light at the same time.

This is the practical nature of how the inshining Light rules and governs in my conscious and conscience. Not by identification with outward ethical standard or testimonies but by the direct experience of the spiritual movement of the increase, decrease, or stasis of the inshining Light as it illuminates my conscious and conscience. in my experience this is the essence of being or consciousness that is rules and governed by the inward Spirit of Christ.

In the context of the NWYM disunity and NCYM disunity, I know of no occasion wherein either side has advocated or set out to kill or enslave the other side. Had they done so, I could not in a conscious anchored in and a conscience informed by and in participation with the inshining Light, support or find such behavior edifying.

Based upon your identification with outward ethical standards, you seem to be drawing some equivalency between the disunity in the aforesaid yearly meetings with killing and enslavement. I stand before you participating in the Light of Christ and find no conviction in my conscience about the edifying nature of the separation that resulted. To be more specific, in the Light of Christ there is no dimming of the light when I support those Meetings who support and embrace LBGTQ people. Also, in the Light of Christ there is no dimming of the Light in my support of those who do not embrace LGBTQ people. If, in the light, I were to speak out against Meetings who support LBGTQ people, I sense a dimming of the inshining Light in my conscience. If, in the light, were to speak out against those Meetings who do not embrace LGBTQ people, in the like, manner I sense a dimming of the Light in my conscience. The literal experience of the relative illumination of the Light itself in itself upon my conscious and conscience is my standard. Outward ethical standards like diversity on one side and an adherence to outward biblical standards on the other simply do not inform or guide. The Light of Christ itself in itself is my guide. Now, if one side or the other were to set out to impose their conscience over against that of the other and thereby not rest in their witness and habitation in the Light, the inshining Spirit in my conscience could not hold their actions edifying.

I can certainly see that, if you equate or liken (even in small measure) the disunity and resulting separation in the NWYM and NCYM with killing and enslavement, then I completely understand your confusion. If, in your conscience, based upon a set of outward standards or testimonies, you find such a likeness it is not for me to criticize.

I would like to ask you a question out of curiosity. Which sides do you find unethical in the context of NWYM and NCYM disunity and resulting separation? And why?

Comment by Daniel Wilcox on 2nd mo. 10, 2017 at 12:30pm

This is difficult for me typing on small device, am traveling. I was writing a response to you, but then the internet crashed:-(. Try again. It appears we have a completely different view of reality! Especially when you speak of leaving forms of ethics. More later semi get a computer

Comment by Daniel Wilcox on 2nd mo. 10, 2017 at 12:33pm

If you don't base your ethic s on an outward ethics, I wonder why you even bother with outward dialog:-)?

Comment by Keith Saylor on 2nd mo. 10, 2017 at 1:01pm

----

Hello Daniel,

That is okay. I am not being sarcastic when I say ... I acknowledge there is a different reality and I am okay with our being of a different reality. When I speak to people who, by their own admission, say they are guided and informed by outward formal ethics, for example, I use outward words to exhort to a way of being that is not guided and informed by outward forms. There is a fundamental different between using outward words to affirm outward forms and using outward words to exhort out of the use of outward forms to guide and inform. It is my experience that such exhortation does result in experiential Witness of the reality of a conscious anchored in and conscience informed by the movement of the inshining Spirit itself in itself without regard to or respect for outward ethical forms. However, it is not mine to bring about that that witness. It is only mine to speak it. I am sure you have noticed the testimony to that which I witness is specific. It is a testimony of a completely different way of being, a different mind altogether. The testimony speaks specifically to a way of being guided and informed by the literal and direct experience of the relative ebb and flow of immanent Presence (inshining Light, Holy Spirit, Spirit of Christ) in the conscious and conscience so that the Guide is the experience of the inshining Light itself as it increases and decreases relative to our actions and interactions through our lives. Outward ethical forms just are no longer in play. It has been my experience that, while people may not share a witness such a way of being, the testimony brings them right up against it even if they reject it.

Comment by Forrest Curo on 2nd mo. 10, 2017 at 3:42pm

I think the point is this: When you become attuned to God's Spirit within, the results (as that tuning develops) are supposed to become more in accord with what God wants of us.

Paul has his list of "fruits of the Spirit", while Stephen Gaskin observes that "God wants justice and freedom and health and happiness and equality for everyone. If you know that that's what God really wants, you'll help out along those lines." A person's growth into actions that promote and enhance such results may take time and experience --

which means experience of results, inward and/or outward.

The bottom line, as Jesus put it, would not be whether one was compliant with 'outward ethical forms' -- but it would insist that that "By their fruits you shall know them."

Sometimes a person who has "Just Found Jesus" will do you the biggest favor he knows how: preaching at you in hopes of getting you to realize "Christianity As He Knows It." It's a sincerely well-meant gesture, but gets delivered with the nasty flavor of whatever distortions of God's nature he hasn't yet been led out of.

A relentless message of "I've been led beyond reliance on outward rules of conduct and you can be too!" comes to resemble that sort of new-convert ferver, but I hope that persistence in following that leading may eventually pay off.

Whatever mistakes we make (plenty, to my observation) God seems to be at work even with them.

Comment by Keith Saylor on 2nd mo. 10, 2017 at 4:54pm

Hello Forrest,

Yes, I am relentless. Immanent Presence first appeared onto my conscious and conscience when I was twenty five years old. Over the past 29 years I have my participation with and in the inshining Light has been a journey between outright rejection and completely embracement. For most of those years I have given testimony to the witness of the inward Light and having come out of regard for and adherence to outward forms. This Witness has been the unchangable impulse in my life ... even during those couple of times I tried to completely push it out of my conscious and conscience. I am edified that you find my relentlessness and fervor something resembling a new-convert. Becaues I experience every day the butterflies in my stomach (as I did 29 years ago) as I walk in the shining of the Light itself. Every day is a being re-born in the Light itself in itself. I literally fall into Love every day and every moment. I not sure you meant your words to edify, but they surely did. Thank you.

Comment by Forrest Curo on 2nd mo. 10, 2017 at 5:19pm

I am not your teacher. But what I have observed -- for whatever enlightenment you might find in it -- is that your realization looks to be more menu than meal. Some day I'd like to see it take a freer, less defensive, more creative way of manifestation, with more acceptance of the fact that God has more ways of reaching people, more ways of communing with us than any one of us has known or can imagine.

?

Comment by Forrest Curo on 2nd mo. 11, 2017 at 1:09pm

What I'd say about my own realization? Is that I'm not always sufficiently aware of God, but find God at work in what happens all the same.

Comment

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page