Bipartite or Tripartite Nature of Man?

[Freedom]

And the findings were that many (toward most) of the items within the spirit were also characteristics of the soul. Both decide, will, consider, and so on. It almost appears that there is something added to the soul of man that makes it all more than the soul of other animals. More so than the notion that there was some independent/separate "organ" added to man.

And while there is some argument for separation, it is so difficult that it takes a sharp, two-edged sword to figure out the difference. And the difference is likened to joints and marrow. All part of the support structure of the human body. No, the two are not identical, but neither is complete without the other. And since we generally think of a soul as being complete, then the spirit is more about nuances of the soul than some independent thing.

This is how I tend to look at things. I don’t outright reject that there is a difference between the soul and spirit, however, I also feel no need to endorse such a view. Genesis 2 says that man became a living soul after receiving the breath of life. Just from that I think we have what we need to understand the essence of our existence, particularly that there is both a physical and immaterial aspect. Even more importantly is the understanding that God Himself was needed to bring the physical world to life. Although some aspects of existence are incomprehensible, there is no reason to think that there would be some esoteric “key” needing to be discovered.

I feel comfortable with viewing existence as being understood as a body/soul dualism. Even the Greek philosophers gravitated towards this understanding more or less. And it makes sense, the Bible clearly distinguishes the body and soul. The soul survives the body, and has a greater importance than the body:
Matt 10:28 And do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. But rather fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell. (NKJV)

It seems like WN/WL attempted to purport that a certain understanding of existence (tripartite nature) is necessary to be a Christian. In other words, the view is not that existence itself would lead us to God. They like the “glove” analogy, saying that we’re devoid of purpose, waiting to be filled. Maybe that’s not completely wrong, per se, but it neglects the fact that creation itself should lead us to God:
Rom 1:20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse (NKJV)

With that in mind, I do not think there is any superfluous or supplementary understanding necessary to be saved or to know God. It’s really not that hard. Evolutionists think they have it all figured out, but they can’t offer an explanation for the immaterial. The ‘soul’ aspect of humans is what defines us. Much of it is indeed inexplicable, but there is not need to make it overly complicated.