Comment by Keith Saylor on 5th mo. 22, 2017 at 1:48pm

History —-

Early in the history of the Children of Light it happened that a man among them (and those who followed him) made it known that God had told him to recommend certain institutional forms and practices to the whole of the gathering. This man was George Fox. There were those among the Children of Light whose conscience did not conform to God’s recommendation to Fox. God guided them in a different direction. So they stated plainly that they would not conform, however, it was well that others who were lead in their own conscience to take up these forms and practices should, by all means, do so.

And so it happened that over time Fox began to reflect on those who did not conform to the forms and practices he recommended, that they were dark and evil people who lacked discernment and that they must conform to the recommendations because God had given them to him as mediator. Fox went further to suggest (along with Barclay and Others) that not following these recommendations were going against God because God had given the recommendations to him.

Those who Fox reflected upon in such a way reflected the same upon Fox … calling him of a dark, evil, deceptive, spirit that lacked discernment because he had set himself up as a Moses to the Children of Light and that they had been brought out of bondage to outward forms and practices and would not be led back into such a process. Furthermore, they testified to the witness that they were neither guided or informed by any man or women, even those who set themselves up as mediators between them and God, as Fox hand done. It is important to here understand what those who would not come into conformity with Fox were testifying to. They were guided and informed directly by the inward Light itself in itself. The Life itself was their sole guide. There was no need for men and women to meditate between God and them. They experienced and participated in the Life itself and were guided by that Light directly without mediation. When Fox, and those who followed him, demanded conformity to God’s recommendation to them even in the face of their conscience being led otherwise; many early quakers reflected upon Fox as usurping the prerogative of Christ as sole rule and guide over the consciences of people and setting himself up as a Moses over the Children of Light.

William Rogers, in his “Historical Treatise” laid down for “posterity,” entitled “The Christian Quaker …” published in 1680, documents the struggle between these two groups and shares the testimony of those who would not conform to the “Foxonian” recommendations. In the Preface to his work Rogers writes:

“Oh Friends! Let therefore this cry pass through every heart. To our Own. To our Own. To own Own., (That is to say, to every ones own measure of Christ’s Light or Grace of God Received, which the Apostle saith is sufficient) with this secret breathing of Spirit unto the God of our lives, that all may be thereto retired. For if that Counsel might but take place, it seems to me, that there could then be no room for any to impose, or press the observation of other men's Lines upon any (which no doubt is one great occasion of the religious differences treated on) and not only so, but it would mold all, (who retain the name of Christianity) into the very nature thereof, and so consequently, a reconciliation in the everlasting Truth might quickly ensue …”

To Ellis and Patricia. I re-affirm. I am not guided or informed by you or any other person including George Fox.

Ellis, Your words are of no profit to my conscience. Not to suggest they are of no profit to the consciences of others.

I am the Light itself in itself and the Life and Word is in me. The notions and constructs you have reflected upon me and the people you try to associate, in negative reflection, with who I am, suggests you do not understand who I am and the nature of being that participates in immanent Life itself. Others here know exactly the experience of who I am through who I am in themselves; as I know who they are through that which I share in them. For I affirm, I am the Life in me and able alleviate to plight of men and women. I am able to enlighten people. I am the Life and I am able to do all those thing you say I am unable. I am the Life itself in itself and the Life is all around me and those who know this Life I also know. For the Life who they are and the Life who I am, is One with the Life that was Jesus and the Life that is come again and is coming upon his death and resurrection. As those early Quakers, my conscious and conscience is turned to the Light itself and I will hold to that measure of who I am in Light and for in the Light I am the Light itself.

I nod to your measure of the Light as I hold to that of my own without reflecting upon you.

NOTE: To those interested, I am currently in the process of keyboarding and republishing, in electronic format, the entirety of William Rogers “The Christian Quaker …” Information and progress can be found here. Including a downloadable facsimile of Roger’s Treatise.

http://www.quakerquaker.org/profiles/blogs/online-version-of-willia...

Comment by Forrest Curo on 5th mo. 22, 2017 at 4:23pm

Patricia -- As you know, early Friends spent considerable time in jail under suspicion of being Ranters or blasphemers -- because people would scrutinize their words from the assumption that what they were talking about was different from the customary readings of Christian scriptures. Jesus himself did not escape that sort of hostile scrutiny.

As far as the way Keith interprets and describes his mode of experience, it is not identical with how I'd put it. But I see the significance of Who/What underlies that experience as beyond my judgement, because ultimately that's between Keith and God, who remains quite capable of explaining Himself -- only not always the same way to all people or all peoples. That is, whatever distortions make exist in the perception/reception of God by me, Keith, or anyone else here, these do not invalidate the presence of God.

So it is not a question of some special gift or talent

belonging to me, you, or anyone else, whether for prayer or discernment or accurate reading of texts

but of the power of God to address everyone in their religious languages -- and correct each person as needed, in whatever time they're ready to hear that.

In the meantime, as Howard says, this seems to be a conversation between people talking about different things.

Comment by Ellis Hein on 5th mo. 22, 2017 at 11:09pm

Howard, I realize I am behind in my responses and am playing catch-up.

If you look at the context of the Scriptures you quoted you would easily see they do not support Keith's witness about himself as you assert. Lets start with the John 14 text (12-21)
Truly, truly, I say to you, he who believes in me will also do the works that I do; and greater works than these will he do, because I go to the Father. Whatever you ask in my name, I will do it, that the Father may be glorified in the Son; if you ask anything in my name, I will do it. If you love me, you will keep my commandments, And I will pray the Father, and he will give you another counselor, to be with you for ever, even the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees him nor knows him; you know him, for he dwells with you, and will be in you. I will not leave you desolate; I will come to you. Yet a little while and the world will see me no more, but you will see me; because I live, you will live also. In that day you will know that I am in my Father and you in me and I in you. He who has my commandments and keeps them, he it is who loves me; and he who loves me will be loved by my father, and I will love him and minifest myself to him.

Of note in this entire discourse is the sentiment, "that the Father may be glorified in the Son." There is no indication that the disciples are now going to claim to be the light and the life. The source always remains from the Father and the Son.

Ok, the John 17 passage. Again a central concern in this passage is, as expressed in verse 5:

...and now, Father, glorify thou me in thy own presence with the glory which I had with thee before the world was made.

Jesus continues with his prayer and states:

They are not of the world, even as I am not of the world. Sanctify them in the truth; thy word is truth. As thou didst send me into the world, so I have sent them into the world (16-19)

How was Jesus sent into the world?

For I have not spoken on my own authority; the Father who sent me has himself given me commandment what to say and what to speak. And I know that his commandment is eternal life, What I say, therefore, I say as the Father has bidden me. (Joyn 12:49-50)

So, continuing on in John 17:

I do not pray for these only, but also for those who are to believe in me through their word, that they may all be one; even as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be in us, so that the world may believe that thou has sent me. The glory which thou has give me I have given to them that they may be one even as we are one, I in them and thou in me, that they may become perfectly one, so that the world may know that thou has sent me and has loved them even as thou has loved me. (20-23)

The unity Jesus is talking about is a oneness that comes about because those who believe in Jesus hear and follow his voice. There is no confusion among them about the source of life. Man shall live by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God, as Moses stated and Jesus reiterates in the passages I have quoted above.

I have written the words Jesus gave me to write. These you object to because they are "a message of fear, judgement, and condemnation of others who do not conform to your hierarchical view of spirituality that is steeped in a literal interpretation of the Bible..." You see my words as an indication that I "hold onto ancient written words of others as inerrant instruments of judgement." and you advise that I should "love others as you love yourself and love God with all your heart."

If you knew the love of God you would understand that it is the the profound expression of that love to warn and confront those who are going the wrong way. And when God raises up a witness to speak (or write) to reprove evil, that judgment is given for the benefit of the one going in the wrong direction. It is this process you are condemning and seeking to hinder. Why then should it be a surprise that you cannot find unity with what I am doing and writing?

Comment by Forrest Curo on 5th mo. 22, 2017 at 11:21pm

I do not believe that Keith is claiming that Keith Saylor is the Light. As I understand his position, that would be that the Light is speaking the words posted here under the name Keith Saylor. Keith himself doesn't believe that he, personally, is experiencing anything _as_ "Keith Saylor", merely the life and activity of God ongoing.

You might look on that as 'spiritual inflation,' or as the annihilation of his own personality, or as simply his interpretation of what it is he experiences. It's a verbal "Keith Saylor is not in" sign.

He may be right; he may be (I'm inclined to think) mistaken -- but he isn't making the sort of personal claim you're arguing against.

Comment by Howard Brod on 5th mo. 23, 2017 at 8:13am

We should all be living as full beings in the Light in order to fulfill the hopes Jesus expressed. 

I do believe that you, Ellis, and Patricia are missing the spirit and effect of Jesus' heart because you are parsing the words you are reading - obsessing over their construct.  Most important you are missing the natural result of taking the same journey into the Light that Jesus took because you approach spirituality from a doctrinal perspective.  This is a limiting spiritual practice for many reasons.  First, it dives you deeply into your own human analytical mind which is not conducive to living in the Spirit.  You are using the intellectual mind and ego to let books guide you to live in the Spirit, when living in the Spirit can only fully occur by doing just that: living in the Spirit with your spirit.  Your intellectual reasoning and ego are the great deceivers you so fear because there is no possible way you can be sure those words written thousands of years ago are accurate or even rendered exactly as Jesus spoke them.  I have spoken with linguist who are familiar with the ancient language Jesus spoke - and Forrest is correct when he says that it was written in what to us would seem to be a type of code almost expressed as riddles.  Inflection, tone, and expression (both with hands and face) greatly changed the meaning of the raw written appearance.  Not to mention that the amount of words available in that ancient language was greatly reduced from our own modern English where all those non-written expressions can be expressed in our writing.

The Light is innate as Jesus (and I might add, others) modeled for us.  Your literalist, ego approach is cheating you from that potential full Light experience, causing you to worship doctrine, words that are now rendered far different than they were originally communicated, holy books, and an ego desire to feel special in God's eyes.

Once one experiences the same Light-experience that Jesus or Buddha or others have had - they indeed will speak in words and phraseology that expresses that fullness in the Light they are identified with and experiencing.  I can't help but wonder why anyone would object to another person having that full experience as they fulfil that same experience that Jesus advocated.  Only human ego and perhaps jealousy or perhaps an unrecognized need to assume a role as judge would lead one to do this.

Forrest, in my opinion, has expressed here much guidance and wisdom in approaching spiritual thought and reading.  I've re-read it and have gained even more appreciation for his advice.  I highly recommend doing so yourself.

Comment by Keith Saylor on 5th mo. 23, 2017 at 8:41am

There is a line set down by other people relative to a person’s relationship with and participation in immanent Presence. This line or wall is heavily guarded and fortified by the protectorate of outward forms. The outward weapons of this protectorate are religious and political ideology, theology, tradition, similitudes, practices, etc. The nuclear weapon of the protectorate is the abstracted “God” who speaks to them and tells them how to direct and lead others so that to not follow the protectorate’s direction is to not follow God; for it is not the protectorate you are turning against but God who the protectorate mediates. “And after all” says the protectorate, we love you and we only want what is good for you and what God tells us is good for you.” This is the weapon they use when all else fails against those who just will not come to heel and have crossed the line and speak to such participation in and identification with immanent Presence that they experience their being as immanent Presence itself in itself and no longer look to outward constructs and other people to guide and direct. The protectorate and the weapons they use to bring others to heel becomes of no consequence. This interpenetration between and oneness with immanent Presence itself in itself and human being is the line that the protectorate will not abide crossing but have no power to repress once the Life itself in itself is known and embraced in human being.

I am the Life itself in itself to the measure that this Life is in me anchoring my conscious and informing my conscience. I declare to have crossed line. I have breached the wall and stand on the raggedy edge and I intend to misbehave.

Comment by Patricia Dallmann on 5th mo. 23, 2017 at 9:46am

Anyone who knows the one, true God can see your rebellion, Keith. 

We are grateful that God who has created us all visits us to give of himself that we may not walk in the darkness of the Tempter who speaks  lies, telling us that we, too, can be as gods. Silly man, who gives up his joy, his image of God, in which life is a blessing: gives up all that is good to life for what: a little castle, a little "protectorate" in which he can sit as king, opposing God and exalting himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped, so that he as God sits in the temple of God showing himself that he is God. You're not unusual in this, Keith. It's very commonplace. 

I can dismantle your little metaphysical metaphor with reason, as well, but I won't if God doesn't lead me to do so. His creatures, we all have been given the gift of reason, and it helps us to live. But man does not live by God's gifts alone, but by every word from the mouth of God. The reason and power of analysis and all God's gifts (Scripture; sound doctrine; tradition; the law; the prophets; the promises; the stories; the capacity for thought, feeling, learning, discussion) all are exercised and at the ready to fight the destroyer of Man's soul. We are empowered to fight lies by presenting the truth; we are empowered to fight confusion by exposing its faulty logic; we are empowered to fight hatred by feeling the infinite Love of God surround and keep us. We are faithful and true in the exercise of his gifts. God has given his Logos, and he has given us logic. Those who bury this talent will have it taken away from them and given to someone who has ten times the amount. 

We are more than compensated for our labor by his presence and his love. So, we walk in the light as he is in the light, for he is our Lord, the Lord of righteousness. We worship him in Spirit and in Truth. 

Comment by Patricia Dallmann on 5th mo. 23, 2017 at 10:20am

You wrote, Howard: Your intellectual reasoning and ego are the great deceivers you so fear because there is no possible way you can be sure those words written thousands of years ago are accurate or even rendered exactly as Jesus spoke them. 

Our understanding of the words of scripture does not depend on the accuracy or rendering of Jesus's exact words. It is the spirit behind the words that speaks to us, and that spirit is what allows us to receive the meaning of the words. When we are quiet and open to the Lord, he gives us the spirit of understanding, which we give to those who have ears to hear. But many hearts are hardened and do not receive. 

You wrote: Forrest is correct when he says that it was written in what to us would seem to be a type of code almost expressed as riddles.

This is a classic example of the metaphor used by Jesus in John 10 when he speaks of those who climb up and try to get into the sheepfold by some way other than the door, which is Jesus. Thieves and robbers, he calls them. 

Howard wrote: Once one experiences the same Light-experience that Jesus or Buddha or others have had - they indeed will speak in words and phraseology that expresses that fullness in the Light they are identified with and experiencing. 

God gives us the power of discernment when he gives us his spirit. Until then, we can't possibly judge another's condition, whether it is in grace or whether it is in rebellion. All the secondary authorities (Scriptures, logic etc.) are just helps to keep us from a worse state than our natural selves are already in and prone to. These secondary authorities can't bring you to God, but they can keep you from something worse than natural ignorance. (Think of them as guard rails on a road. They don't ensure that you will be a good driver, but they keep you from running off the road and thus are a help in getting you where you want to go.) 

Jesus used many beautiful parables, metaphors, and actions in his ministry. By this variety, he sought by analogy to inform what was beyond and unknown to the people, the spirit of God. God's abundance is manifest in the great variety of his language. I suggest that when you encounter language that is stilted, numbingly repetitive as if to brain-wash or catechize, that you consider what spirit is behind those words, and ask God to help you to reject any falsehood you may be unable to immediately see, and ask him to give you his truth. Ask with your whole heart, for your Life depends upon receiving the truth. The Lord bless you and keep you.   

Comment by Keith Saylor on 5th mo. 23, 2017 at 10:21am

Patricia wrote:

"Silly man, who gives up his joy, his image of God, in which life is a blessing: gives up all that is good to life for what: a little castle, a little "protectorate" in which he can sit as king, opposing God and exalting himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped, so that he as God sits in the temple of God showing himself that he is God. You're not unusual in this, Keith. It's very commonplace.

I acknowledge that you think I am a silly man and embrace it. For it is all you have left when faced with those of us who know the Life itself in itself anchoring our conscious and informing our conscience and who are clothed in immanent Presence. All you can do is denigrate and label. Your outward weapons of denigration are all you have and they are of no consequence.

Comment by Patricia Dallmann on 5th mo. 23, 2017 at 10:46am

You wrote, Keith: For it is all you have left when faced with those of us who know the Life itself in itself anchoring our conscious and informing our conscience and who are clothed in immanent Presence. 

God is infinite and infinitely abundant in his love and in his power to create. If you knew the love of God, he in his infinite love and wisdom, would give you of himself. You could then give more to the world than your six-point catechism, repeated ad nauseum, which glorifies yourself and not your Creator.

We, who have been favored to know God, know and receive from abundant Life, strength, wisdom, love, hope, joy, guidance, power, and peace. And, in love to God and to our neighbor, we give these to the world, that they too may have fellowship with us. 

May God's peace come to your weary soul. Repent. 

 

Comment

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 3
• 4
• 5
• 6
• 7
• …
• 10
• Next ›
• Page