[testallthings]

OBW, I know you are a very logical person, and I share with you the same skepticism when I see
“the leaps in logic, the over-simplifying, the tricks of rhetoric to make the hearer/reader follow when there is nothing actually presented that connects to follow, etc..”

You said,
“I've got to disagree. If the Spirit witnesses with our spirit, then they are not mingled, or in any way a single spirit. Unless you are seriously bipolar, you never disagree with yourself. A single, mingled spirit could never do anything but agree with itself. Therefore it would be irrelevant to say that they agree with each other since it is to say that it agrees with itself.

I sure hope so.

But since there is stated a sense of agreement, they must not be the same, but rather two that are (at least at times) "on the same page" about things.

So there is a distinction that is never obliterated in the "tea" of mingling.”

I say Amen to what you said about the fact that the two spirits are distinct. As far as I remember that's what W. Lee taught. In any case we should at least let him explain what he meant by the term mingling. If we start with the wrong premises or definition of terms than ....well you know logic better than me.

I feel the need to clarifying something about my last post and my posts in general. In the last one I was not defending, or proving the teaching concerning the mingled spirit. That would require a lot more effort, time, and space. If that had been my aim I would have not just quoted few passages (which clearly do not do justice to W. Lee's teaching on the subject) but first of all I would have read carefully a couple of books on the subject, and then state my reasons for or against it. I I have not the desire, neither the time to do so. It will also appear weird. On one thread I'll “criticize” on another I'll “defend” W. Lee interpretations.

Let me say something about my posts in general. Usually they deal with small points, because they do not require lots of study, research, etc.. There are some big issues I'll like to discuss but I just mention them without going to deep. There is one in particular that is dear to me, one that I mentioned on the other thread of mine about W. Lee's horrible teaching about the incarnation of the Lord Jesus. But just to scratch the surface of that subject requires too much from me.

I am satisfied to present to those who read my posts some hints, thoughts, different point of view,
about certain things I disagree with W. Lee. I am aware of my inability to present my views in the most clear and logical way. My hope is that others might find the desire and the time to ponder over the thing shared in my posts and see for themselves if there is anything that may stir up their desire to see if these things are so.