[OBW]

There are surely cases where the same word has two meanings, but that is not the same as two sides to truth. For example, we use the word "salvation" to refer to initial regeneration, but also to refer to aspects of sanctification. That does not give "salvation" two sides, but simply discussed two different uses of the word.

It is possible that much of the talk was more about symmetry rather than two-foldedness. But they are actually related.

And there probably are places where there are two aspects, or sides, but where those sides are not contradictory, just different. For example, there are several of the terms surrounding salvation/justification/sanctification which are used both as facts and as ongoing processes. That is not really two different sides but the acknowledgment that on one hand we have received a deposit of that item while on the other hand we are growing in it as a trait. It is not a true contradiction or opposing side, but is the completeness of the term.

I think that Lee spent too much of his mental energy looking for and teaching symmetry, two sides, etc., in such a manner that he looked for it where it was not, or found things that were not really related and created a symmetry or a connection that could be passed off as two sides. For this reason, I think that we should always question those teachings that already exist and also resist the urge to follow in his footsteps in expecting this two-sidedness or symmetry.