It doesn’t seem contradictory to me because there is nothing fundamentally different about the light given by the “light of Christ” and that given by “the Spirit.” That’s what D&C 50 seems to be suggesting when it says that “that which is of God is light.” Notice that D&C 50 doesn’t refer to it as the “light of Christ” when it talks about receiving light on condition (“receiveth light, and continueth in God”).

However, if my taxonomy isn’t working for you, it is not a fundamental point. There are not that many mentions of the “light of Christ” in the scriptures (as this series illustrates), and it’s entirely possible that I am making it out to be a bit more clear-cut than it is when I suggest that the term “the light of Christ” is reserved for the portion of light given to everyone without condition.

In April 1977 General Conference, Pres. Marion G. Romney said there are “three phases of the light of Christ”.

Perhaps we have spiritual dimmer switches instead of on/off switches. Some stars shine brighter than others.

and

he that receiveth light, and continueth in God, receiveth more light

seem contradictory to me…

How far do you take the “all things are governed” point?

I don’t take it to mean that all written laws are attempts to articulate the “one true law.” Here’s how I see it. We are currently in touch with the moral law by virtue of the light of Christ. In that sense, we are governed by that law. Our response to the light we are given is the basis of our progress or condemnation. “That which is of God is light; and he that receiveth light, and continueth in God, receiveth more light; and that light groweth brighter and brighter until the perfect day.”

As I said in my post on ethics, people are judged on their intents. People are good inasmuch as they try to do what they understand to be right. If you think of everyone at varying degrees of glory, each held to the standard of the light they know, each judged based according to their understanding and capacity–free to gain more light by obedience or lose light by disobedience– it makes sense to say that the light of Christ is the law by which all things are governed. At least, that is the most important sense in which things are governed by the light of Christ in my estimation.

Do you agree then with my conclusion that the light of Christ is any and all ways that God communicates himself unto us by various means.

Well, I probably wouldn’t put it that way, no. I understand the “light of Christ” to be a name given to a specific manifestation of God’s light, namely, the light that is given without condition to every person. Additional light we are given on condition of obedience is through the spirit. I am not here making a metaphysical distinction, but a linguistic one. We refer to the unconditional light given to everyone differently than other dispensations of God’s light. So, I wouldn’t refer to the gift of the Holy Ghost, or angelic visitations, or open visions as the light of Christ, and I don’t know of anywhere the scriptures do.

I first admit I did Gloss over the “it is the law by which all things are governed” aspect in my post, and you articulated many points around this very well.

So from your perspecitve, the Law of Christ is the Light of Christ? How far do you take the “all things are governed” point? (I should probably go back and look at my post #1, If I recall correctly) Are all the Written Laws of Christendom simply verbal attempts to articulate the one true law, being the rule of the Light of Christ?

And I have to ask, Do you agree then with my conclusion that the light of Christ is any and all ways that God communicates himself unto us by various means.

The angels of God, or their influence, always come in light. It may be light to the eyes if it be a personal appearance, or the light that leads to righteous works if it be a spiritual message.