Page 160 - THE REVELATION OF THE THIRD HEAVEN and THE MEAT OF THE WORD

8)
Experience required under the Law according to the perpetrator's actions (Deut
30:19)
Generational effect (Ex 20:5-6).

Job sins (Job 22:5), and eventually acknowledges his sins under the Law (Job 3:1,
7:20-21, 16:8, 40:4) These sins were, in addition to his prior fear, the accusing of
his true, though imperfect, comforters (Job 2:11-13, 32:2-3, 42:7) of being
miserable comforters (Job 16:2) and in believing himself to be justified before God
(Job 32:1-2) which exemplifies the expressive nature of Job 1:1.

Job further sins in stating various slurs against God (Job 2:6, 9:17, 18) and his
friends (Job 16:2). The phrase ‘without cause’ (Job 9:17) is a parabolical
expression (Job 2:3, 40:8, 42:6). The suffering was required under the Prime
Principle in the best interests of Job’s life, that is his eternal status (Job 19:25, Rom
8:28).

The words of the friends of Job are right as part of the Word as a default and for us
as the reader but they were inappropriate for Job as the hearer in part (Job 42:7).
Other parts of what Eliphaz says are untrue (Job 22:6-9, 29:12-13, 42:7). This
establishes that untruths are uttered in the Word of Truth though obviously not by
the one Word in its whole, single and holistic context and nature. Peter's denials

are a case in point (Mat 26:72).

Job foretells his own Salvation and resurrection (Job 14:17, 19:25-6) in the present
tense (Job 19:25 ‘my redeemer’) in accordance with the Word tense sense,
following upon his future call (Job 14:15) that will (tense sense again) take place in
Heaven (Job 42:12 ‘latter end’). The episode of Job is similar to that of the rich
man in that God is interacting with a man in order that he might be saved (Luke
16:19).

Hebrews 11:35 is an example of the Prime Principle. The phrase ‘better
resurrection’ can only refer to being resurrected, in this case at the first
resurrection, to eternal salvation as opposed to being unsaved at the Judgement and
subsequently condemned. It does not refer to some salvations being better than
others, degrees of status amongst the resurrected saints or one saint's resurrection
being a better one than that of another saint (Mat 19:17, 20:13, Rom 3:20, Col
1:22, 27-28, 2:9-10, Jam 2:1, 9, 1 Pet 1:17, 1 John 3:19, Rev 21:7). The different
rewards of the saints after resurrection do not effect how good a reward is or
establish one as better than the other. These differentiate saints in that each saint is