Bipartite or Tripartite Nature of Man?

Originally Posted by Ohio

OK SheepDawg, fair enough. I'll st on the sidelines while you make a "much wider point than I have seen."

Sorry about the early pushback. Boards like this are noted for that, me in particular, and we do get ex-LC'ers from time to time who apply stray points in an attempt to discredit the scriptures. I'm sure you can understand that.

Dear Ohio,

When I said, "much wider point than what you have seen" I did not mean that in the way of "Oh, here is something fresh and new the Lord has revealed to me in the Scriptures that I have seen and nobody else, including you". No. I meant that statement only in regards to, and limited to, the information I myself had given in my earlier post. That, that information was insufficient for you to discern my intentions. I meant that there was no possible way that you could have known what I intended to talk about based on that little information.

And what I meant by "much broader issue" was simply that I wasn't really engrossed with whether Jesus and Paul were saying different things or not. Of course they weren't. I simply meant to say that I wanted to lead the conversation to something else I thought would be of interest to everyone (though in keeping with the subject of the thread). I'm sure you probably know your bible backwards and forwards in Chinese, back to front in Aramaic, and up side down in Spanish. So I wasn't saying, "hey, Ohio, you ignorant hillbilly, here's something that you don't know". Not at all. I just wanted to introduce another interesting spin on things that are familiar to you and everybody else.

I ain't no Mota, bro.

Grace and Peace.

I came across the board and the topic by chance as I have been asking the same question.

The best answer I found so far is from "Systematic Theology" chapter 23 "The Essential Nature of Man" by Wayne Grudem. The outline of the chapter may be found at http://www.christianessentialssbc.co...007/041507.pdf. The lecture audio may be found at http://archive.scottsdalebible.com/a...415WGrudem.mp3

Also I found a helpful article titled "What About Watchman Nee’s Teaching on Soul and Spirit?" by Gordon Ferguson at http://gordonferguson.org/articles/w...ul-and-spirit/

[Cal]

Originally Posted by Peter

I came across the board and the topic by chance as I have been asking the same question.

The best answer I found so far is from "Systematic Theology" chapter 23 "The Essential Nature of Man" by Wayne Grudem. The outline of the chapter may be found at http://www.christianessentialssbc.co...007/041507.pdf. The lecture audio may be found at http://archive.scottsdalebible.com/a...415WGrudem.mp3

Also I found a helpful article titled "What About Watchman Nee’s Teaching on Soul and Spirit?" by Gordon Ferguson at http://gordonferguson.org/articles/w...ul-and-spirit/

Hi Peter,

Welcome! I know UntoHim, the owner and moderator of this board, admires Wayne Grudem.

I've never really understood the impulse to categorize man as bipartite. I know some some do, most notably to me, R.C. Sproul. He has said that tripartitism "causes problems" with excessive subjectivity, being sense oriented, and so forth.

I think those who are bipartite are a bit apprehensive of spiritual experience. If you tend toward bipartitism you are going to naturally be cerebral. That fits Sproul's MO.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Peter

I came across the board and the topic by chance as I have been asking the same question.

The best answer I found so far is from "Systematic Theology" chapter 23 "The Essential Nature of Man" by Wayne Grudem. The outline of the chapter may be found at http://www.christianessentialssbc.co...007/041507.pdf. The lecture audio may be found at http://archive.scottsdalebible.com/a...415WGrudem.mp3

Also I found a helpful article titled "What About Watchman Nee’s Teaching on Soul and Spirit?" by Gordon Ferguson at http://gordonferguson.org/articles/w...ul-and-spirit/

Thanks for all that Peter. I remember back around 1970 being completely enthralled with the three circles of man, each divided into three sections. I was ignorant and naive back then.

Now I see our non-material aspect is the awareness reading these words right now. But I'm not sure what happens to it when our body passes.

I don't, however, need scripture to break it all down. I just trust in God. That's His business, not mine. Like my birth, like my death.

[aron]

Originally Posted by Peter

Also I found a helpful article titled "What About Watchman Nee’s Teaching on Soul and Spirit?" by Gordon Ferguson at http://gordonferguson.org/articles/w...ul-and-spirit/

Never paid much attention to the "tripartite man" theory. Apparently was "recovered" by some lady in Brookline Massachusetts in 1922 (Mary McDonough).

Something so critical lay fallow for so many centuries, and uncovered thus, and made the centre-piece of God's move on earth ("economy", "dispensing" &c) in the 20th century?

Or yet another rabbit-hole?

I thought Peter's linked article by Gordon Ferguson was spot-on: "Building a theological system on passages intended to provide practical motivations [i.e. faith in God's complete salvation of the whole person, being "so great a salvation"] is highly suspect, to say the least. However, Nee has not only chosen a suspect approach, he has deemed it absolutely essential to our understanding of the Bible"

[OBW]

I tend more bipartite because I find the so-called distinctions between soul and spirit (which Nee, and then Lee, tried so hard to separate in a neat way) to be so overlapping, by definition, with each other that they could not be separated. And the only place where there is a reference to separating them requires a sharp, two-edged sword of the Spirit.

My reason for somewhat combining them is that the record I see would appear to treat "spirit" (of man) as if it is a part of the soul that is not otherwise found in other animals rather than something completely separate. That is not for the purpose of avoiding more spiritual things. But spiritual is more a part of all of life rather than something unique to "non-secular" experience. In other words, something that is "spiritual" is not so because it is separated from ordinary experience and relegated to what might (without denigration) be called religious experience. Instead, it is spiritual because it comes from the life of ones who are living according to the spirit. That should include the way that we pray, read, learn, drive, shop, "kill time," and so on.

While there are sometimes events, feelings, realizations, emotions, etc., that occur while within somewhat more "religious" undertakings, like praying, reading and meditating on scripture, worship of God (both individually and corporately), I am slow to rely on feelings or emotions, primarily for two reasons.

1. The first goes back to my AOG upbringing (which you may recall or find in one the first posts in my blog) which is very dependent on emotional experiences — even to the extent of making mockery of what God is fully capable of doing and even sometimes does. But a core of believe that insists that the right prayers will bring miracles of all sorts, including causing you to speak in tongues.

2. The second is because of my time in the LRC. There, it was so often the emotional sense created by the belief of spiritual superiority. Also, a propensity to get us whipped-up so that the next thing said (which was too often the important thing) was accepted without reasonable consideration. Too often the sheer litany of otherwise irrelevant verses to which we all shouted "amen" and "hallelujah" to in ever-raising chorus (and rightly so) just made our response to the next statement, which was as erroneous as the day is long, an even louder "hallelujah." No, that did not always happen. But it is just like standing up in the middle of an unrighteous lynching to "call on the Lord three times" so that we can salve ourselves that we are doing the right thing.

And not part of the numbered reasons, insisting on tripartite seems to need a reason. And for the LRC, they had one. So that you could become your own source of God. You don't pray to God, you turn to your spirit. You don't really read and study the scripture. You turn to your spirit. That separate organ that is higher than your soul. That place that is capable of telling you that something is right (or wrong) without any actual tracking to something of scripture or sound teaching. That place that uses your group-think training so that you know how to feel better about going along with the group. That place that has all the teachings of Nee, Lee, and the "brothers" saturated so that you will always feel like they want you to feel.