This is "The Fox Song" or "The George Fox Song," still popular among Quakers, at least up until a generation ago. It is an excellent example of my Yes, but attitude to the theology of the Society of Friends. That in itself is hard to pin down, as it has undergone changes in emphasis since its beginnings in the 1600s. The Puritans persecuted Quakers, yes, but those were also Quakers who sometimes broke into your Sunday worship and threw blood on the altar.
The belief in an inner light, accessible to all, has remained central, though that has moved from an original base that it was a product of the Holy Spirit, meant to accentuate the non-hierarchical priesthood of all believers, who could study the Bible for themselves and go about teaching others. That quickly became more of a belief that all humans were born with access to this light, something akin to the natural law understanding of Paul's Letter to the Romans.
Quakerism was originally strongest in Wales and the West Midlands of England, farther from the centers of power, with an economy of herding that led to many isolated households in the hills. They were therefore suspicious of church hierarchies in London and used to thinking for themselves, conditions that would make an Inner Light doctrine congenial. Of course, this is exactly what I am most suspicious of. I just mentioned in a recent post the commonness of prosperity gospel in Houston, with its boom mentality and focus on getting ahead. People gravitate to the varieties of faith that support their political or cultural values, though best practice would be that this works in the opposite direction. We usually pretend that it does. If I am not convinced that this is true for myself and those I love best I don't see why you should expect I would take your word for it.
A few of the phrases are technically true: steeples will indeed fall eventually and we will not be reading Bibles in heaven. But while the Society of Friends long held to the idea that the light transcended the valuable Scriptures, it was inevitable that many would come to regard the book as somewhat, then mostly, and then entirely beside the point, as is true of some today, replaced by a belief much closer to the syncretism of the UU's.
That is true in Northern New England, anyway. Perhaps it is different in Pennsylvania and elsewhere.