Heaven

Well Keras, all I can say is enjoy your little dream world. I don't know where you get your line of thought from but they're feeding you a lot of baloney. No one can read the bible and without outside influence come up with the idea there is no such thing as heaven. My best advice is to change your feeding grounds. If you can't learn to study the bible without taking into consideration the context of previous and latter chapters you'll never come to the truth.

Hi S4C, Sorry it took a while but a lengthy post deserves its due diligence. Response to post #49.

Trekson’s Quote - I believe there is way more scriptural validity to the rapture theory than there is to your listed scriptures concerning prophecies relating to those of physical Jewish descent. Once one realizes the temporary separation between the two, with different destinies for some that ultimately ends in unity, one can properly divide the word of truth....

Your words: “It took a while to come out, but we now have the position statement above, which exemplifies the major problem inherent with the heresy that is “rapture theory” (and its integration with the false doctrine of pre-wrath).

I-d-e-n-t-i-t-y.

Due to the religious conditioning which has come to dominate most of the denominations and Christian fellowships over the last century, most believers see themselves as members of the so-called “church,” as opposed to the unique title Paul used to describe the saved in the following passage: “For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision [being an Israelite] availeth anything, nor uncircumcision [being a Gentile], but a new creature. And as many as walk according to this rule, peace be on them, and mercy, and upon the Israel of God” (Galatians 6:16).

To phrase this in the simplest language possible, the Apostle Paul is saying being Jewish is worth nothing, and being Gentile is worth nothing, because whatever you were before, in Christ you are now “a new creature,” and this new body of believers is called “the Israel of God.” To put it bluntly, the Christians are the only saved Israel seen in the New Testament.

Your words from a little later in your post: “Because most Christians have been taught they have become members of the so-called “church” (a word that simply means an assembly), the Roman Catholic concept of the “church” replacing Israel came about. The Rapture Cult, realizing the Old Testament promises to Israel must be fulfilled in Israel, then came up with the idea of rotating salvation (the “church” is saved, gets raptured, and then Israel gets redeemed), but both systems are fatally flawed.”

Regarding the “so-called church”. It is not phrase concocted by latter day individuals or the Catholics. It’s first seen as a general use word concerning all believers in Acts 2:47 – “Praising God, and having favour with all the people. And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved.”

Now this wasn’t the church in Jerusalem because the numbers were in the thousands and the first churches met in small groups in houses. There are many scriptural phrases that identify the “called out ones” aka the church from the Greek “ekklesia”. The word “church is used 79 times, “churches” – 34 times, “body” – 22 times, “elect” – 19 times (also includes elected, election and elect’s), “assembly” – 3 times, “called” is another term used also we have “Israel of God: is used “1” time and the “bride” is used 0 times. So forgive me if I don’t identify myself by a term that is only used once when Paul was trying to explain to the Gentile church in Galatia how they qualify to be identified as God’s people over the Jews. Problems always arise when people take an individual verse and build a whole theology around it. With that said, I agree that the church can be identified as a type of “spiritual Israel” and I stated my position on that with my post “The Problem with Dispensationalism”. However, receiving and partaking of the spiritual promises made to the nation of Israel does not negate the reality of physical promises made to the nation of Israel. Regarding the last part of your post: The Rapture Cult, realizing the Old Testament promises to Israel must be fulfilled in Israel, then came up with the idea of rotating salvation (the “church” is saved, gets raptured, and then Israel gets redeemed), but both systems are fatally flawed.”

While pre-trib may believe that pre-wrath does not!

Your words: “Continuing, the $64,000 question that we must correctly answer is, “What is my identity in Christ?”
Your words: “Based on the prophetic texts found in Obadiah, the LORD reproaches the identity seen in the Old Testament as Edom. This is the mysterious name which stands in the way of those who were escaping the wrath of God, by moving through the "crossway" – and it was the wicked Spiritual entity identified as Edom, which sought to stop those seeking salvation at Calvary: "Neither shouldest thou have stood in the crossway, to cut off those of his that did escape…" (Obadiah 1:14http://biblia.com/bible/hcsb/Obadiah 1.14). Edom is a physical identity under the Old Covenant, and a Spiritual identity under the New Covenant.”

I’m not sure what you’re trying to say here. There is nothing “mysterious” about the name Edom. It’s the name that was given to Esau. Gen. 25:30 – “And Esau said to Jacob, Feed me, I pray thee, with that same red pottage; for I am faint: therefore was his name called Edom.” Edom means “red”. My Strong’s says the word “Edom” is not used in the NT so if you could provide scriptural verification for that and where it is used as a “spiritual identity” I would appreciate that. Edom/Esau took over the land possessed by the Horites and then were known as Edomites. Later on, their name changed to the Idumeans, which was the lineage of Herod the Great. The identity of Edom is verified by Obadiah 10.

A quote from later on in your post: “Thus, the Christians are the Spiritual Jews, which relegates the physical Jews to the role of Spiritual Gentiles – who are identified in Obadiah as associated with the identity therein labeled as Edom: "Neither shouldest thou have stood in the crossway, to cut off those of his that did escape…" (Obadiah 1:14).”

The “crossway” was a real passage through the hills that the Edomites blocked, most likely during the Philistine invasion of Jerusalem in 848 - 841BC. Almost everything in Obadiah is millennia old and the prophecies fulfilled long ago although we can see their historical land repossessed in 14 & 15. So whatever conclusion you’re trying to make here is erroneous.

Your words: "For I bear them record that they have a zeal of God, but not according to knowledge… my people are destroyed for lack of knowledge, because thou hast rejected knowledge" (Romans 10:2http://biblia.com/bible/hcsb/Romans 10.2, Hosea 4:6http://biblia.com/bible/hcsb/Hosea 4.6).
Obviously, both verses cited above turn on the issue of identity – i.e. just who is in view that is to be turned away, because they have rejected knowledge. It is self-evident that both verses are addressed to "Israel," yet it is inconsistent to apply the appellation of "my people" to physical Israelites under the New Covenant.

I don’t know anyone that does that. I agree with you that the verses Hosea 2:23, Rom. 9:25, John 15:16, 1 Pet. 2:9, Rom. 11:7 are speaking of the church inheriting the spiritual promises originally given to Israel.

Your words: “This is only the tip of the textual iceberg, in that there are dozens of verses, plainly applied to the Christians, in which the LORD refers to us as "my people" – and yet whenever we see such a phrase, we irrationally assign that sacred role to the physical family of Jacob.”

Again, I don’t know of anyone who has done that.

Your words: "I will no more have mercy on the house of Israel: but I will utterly take them away….for ye are not my people, and I will not be your God" (Hosea 1:6http://biblia.com/bible/hcsb/Hosea 1.6, 10http://biblia.com/bible/hcsb/Hosea 1.10).
Through the prophets Ezekiel and Amos, God even says there is an end to his patience with Israel's backsliding; but he will give them one final opportunity to be redeemed: "Alas, thou son of man, thus saith the Lord God unto the land of Israel: An end, the end is come upon the four corners of the land. An end is come, the end is come…." (Ezekiel 7:2http://biblia.com/bible/hcsb/Ezekiel 7.2, 6http://biblia.com/bible/hcsb/Ezekiel 7.6).
"The end is come upon my people of Israel: I will not again pass by them any more" (Amos 8:2).

The problem here is you’re assuming that every prophecy has future/latter day tendencies, when they don’t. Ezekial is speaking of the soon to come Babylonian conquest. When you read about the restoration of Israel as in Hosea 14, the latter chapters of Ezekial and the last five verses of Amos 9, it is speaking of physical Israel, not the NT church, or as you call it, the Israel of God.

Your words: “Ultimately, JESUS CHRIST himself pointedly tells the Jews their standing has been revoked, as God has determined to call those who were not his people, into the ranks of the chosen: "Therefore I say unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof" (Matthew 21:43).

The above is true but it has a time limit as you posted: "…blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles be come in…” What happens when the “fullness of the Gentiles” comes? The rapture! Just prior to that time, as recorded in Rev. 7 God sets aside 144,000 Israelites for Himself and seals them. He doesn’t seal them just because they’re flesh and blood Israelites. No, they have come to know Christ as their Lord and Savior and Messiah. That is always the only way to come to God. There is no “special” grace given because of their bloodline.

Your words: “The truth is a hard saying, but it is still the truth. When God promised to "remember" Israel, thus fulfilling his promise that Israel's "seed" would be multiplied "as the stars of heaven" (Genesis 26:4http://biblia.com/bible/hcsb/Genesis 26.4), through those same prophets he said he would accomplish this by transforming Israel into a spiritual house: "I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel…I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people" (Jeremiah 31:31, 33).

Yes and no. The seed that will be multiplied are the literal Jews now numbering almost 1 billion in number as of 2012. You should have added the latter part of that vs. “and in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed.” All the nations are blessed because of one man, Christ, not because of the creation of ‘spiritual” Israel. You’re reading into Jer. something that isn’t there. He is speaking of the literal house of Israel. Gentile believers “share” that promise with our saved Jewish brethren.

Your words: “Thus, the Christians are the Spiritual Jews, which relegates the physical Jews to the role of Spiritual Gentiles – who are identified in Obadiah as associated with the identity therein labeled as Edom: "Neither shouldest thou have stood in the crossway, to cut off those of his that did escape…" (Obadiah 1:14).

This is an unbelievable stretch and a total misrepresentation of what Obadiah is speaking about.

Your words: “I realized the common denominator in every one of the rapidly expanding tiers of Post-Tribulationism (e. g. pre-wrath), is the fundamental error that they still see Israel as the chosen people based on flesh and blood: “Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God: neither doth corruption inherit incorruption” (I Corinthians 15:5).

This is a false representation of what I believe as explained earlier.

Your words: “An enormous problem is a rudimentary misunderstanding of the Gospel itself. Jesus Christ repeatedly stated he came to save Israel – even as other verses state God loved the entire world enough to send his Son to redeem all who will respond to his call: “I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel…the Father sent the Son to be the Saviour of the world” (I John 4:14http://biblia.com/bible/hcsb/I John 4.14). When we say that “Israel” rejected Christ, but those who did respond became members of the so called “Church” (a word associated with a generic group of people), we make Christ’s efforts to save Israel either a failure, or at the very least, an unfulfilled promise. The truth is, as Zecharias the father of John the Baptist proclaimed, Christ redeemed Israel in every way he promised: “Blessed be the Lord God of Israel; for he hath visited and redeemed his people” (Luke 1:68).

This shows your rudimentary misunderstanding of the Gospel. To whom did Christ come? You said it, Israel! Who were the first saved upon hearing his teachings? Israelites! Who were the thousands “saved” at the day of Pentecost? Israelites! Who were the thousands saved in the years between Pentecost and when Peter met Cornelius? Israelites! In the first few years there were no Gentiles in sight in the “church”! So NO Christ did NOT fail, and NO, there were no unfulfilled promises and NO they weren’t a “generic” group of people! The gift of salvation although promised to “all” of Israel was always known it would never include ‘all” of Israel. The Gentiles were included after the fact, NOT from the beginning! Your Lk. 1:68 verse is right on but in the literal sense, not in a “spiritual” sense.

Your words: “As Jesus prayed the Father, looking throughout eternity, he flatly stated he had completed the work he was given, and had lost none of those the Father gave him: “That the saying might be fulfilled, which he spake, Of them which thou gavest me have I lost none” (John 18:9).”

Really!! Context, context, context! John 17 :12 – “While I was with them in the world, I kept them in thy name: those that thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is lost, but the son of perdition; (Judas) that the scripture might be fulfilled.” (word in parenthesis mine)
Jesus was NOT “looking throughout eternity.” He was speaking of his twelve disciples and only them!

Your words: “There is no “Church” apart from Israel, and there never was. There is no “Israel” apart from Christ, and there never was. After the cross, there is no physical Jew, and there is no physical Gentile – as EVERYTHING is delineated on a Spiritual plane. There are now Spiritual Jews (the same thing as a Spiritual Israelite), and there are Spiritual Gentiles – thus, all who are truly in Christ, who stand completely in him, with no reliance upon relationships based on flesh and blood, are the “All Israel” which is saved.” (Romans 11:26).

Again, you are mishandling the scriptures to fit your point of view. The “all” of Israel from Romans has NO Gentiles in site. Vs. 26 is after vs. 25 which says, “For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.” Again, there is that time limit so vs. 26 is speaking of natural Israel, NOT “spiritual” Israel.

Your words: “Those who claim the Jews are chosen in their flesh (whether they see themselves as members of the “Church,” or whether they profess themselves to be “Jews”) manifest the Spirit of Antichrist, for the Scriptures repeatedly show that God prophesied He was going to translate Israel into a Spiritual house.” (I Peter 2:5).

The True Israel has “always” been a “spiritual house.” I don’t know where you got the idea of “translate” from. There has always been a separation of a spiritual Israel from a national Israel which are usually referred to as a “remnant”!

Your words: “Every Rapturist (regardless of Pre-Trib or Post-Trib orientation) separates Israel from the fictional “Church” – so they are all preaching another Gospel.”

That is again a false representation of my beliefs. Understand this, I will type slowly…I do not separate the 144,000+ from the church. They are part of the church FIRST and literal Israelites second! However, God has designed for them a different destiny to be fulfilled in the millennium because He needs flesh and blood people with which to re-populate the earth and the 144,000+ are just part of that group! The raptured/resurrected will not be “flesh and blood!”

Your words: “Perhaps a thorough scriptural refutation of the doctrine of pre-wrath is the next order.”

You can try, I suppose, but if you put the same amount of effort in that one as you did this one…I’m not concerned.

Response to post #66 - Your words: "Your “opinion” of my post is not sought, so there’s no point in your “diving in” to a “response.” It’s not your “pov” that any truth seeker, least of all me, is seeking. That we might mutually “agree” is not the objective; rather, truth is the objective -- as defined by Scripture. So you can rest with your presumption of my “faulty assumptions about [your] pov" -- save yourself the effort; no offense intended."

Sorry, but that's the way it works. If one puts out a "generic" post where the OP is mine, it shouldn't be a stretch to assume it's meant for me and you will get a response from me. I try to meet you half way and all you want to put out is negativity. You sir are in no position to judge anyone's point of view because you have not shown yourself to be flawless and I don't claim that either but what I believe is based on over 25 yrs. of personal study and in my opinion presents a clear understanding of scripture for as much as we are shown. Usually when one points a finger there are three pointing back at them. So, if you don't want my "opinion", don't write on my OP and if you ever start your own OP and don't want my opinion, say so. I can't "lay down" what the Holy Spirit has shown and taught me about the end times. My eyes are open to the truth, are yours?

Hi Retro, Thanks for your post and as I respond please consider everything I say as coming from the friendliest manner possible but my “terminology” may not always be the best.

Your words: “No one can have a valid understanding of Scripture without first a valid understanding of the terms one is reading. Terminology is PARAMOUNT to a good understanding of Scripture!”

You are obviously a wordsmith, have an affinity for languages and are a stickler for details. As such that is why your approach to scripture comes from the direction it does. That is why you would make a comment like “terminology is paramount to a good understanding of scripture.” Most of us would not consider that. I would say that “faith and the indwelling of the Holy Spirit is paramount to a good understanding of scripture.”
In my opinion, it’s not the “word” used that is important, it’s the thoughts and meanings “behind” the word that is important. For example, say I told you that a particular object was green. When I look around my property on a sunny, spring day I can see about 40 different shades of green, most of them without an identifying color name. So what color/shade of green comes to your mind? It would really depend on what shades of “greens” you see the most in your daily life. Those will be the ones that come to your mind, but the shades of green that I see the most in my daily life will be the ones that come to my mind. They will most likely be different, yet they’re all still green.

Your words: “It was not at all what I expected to find! Furthermore, all of these words are based on “ouranos.” So, where are these words that mean “heaven of clouds,” “heaven of stars” and “third heaven - God’s abode?” IS there a spatial relationship among these words? Well, “ouranios” is just the adjective form of “ouranos,” and “ouranothen” is just the form of “ouranos” that means “FROM the ouranos.” The only two that could be spatial references to the main word are “epouranios” which is the adjective form of “above the ouranos,” and “mesouraneema,” which means “in the middle of ouranos.” Of the five, it would seem that the “third heaven” should be the highest one, “above the ouranos,” or “epouranios.” However, that’s NOT the word that was used in 2 Corinthians 12:2! I figured that the “heaven of stars,” being the middle “heaven,” would be related to the word “mesouraneema.” That, too, is NOT the word used in 1 Corinthians 15:40-41!

I looked up EVERY ONE OF THESE VERSES and came to the conclusion that “heaven” (“ouranos”) simply means the “sky” and refers to our earth’s "atmosphere!” “Epouranios” refers to the area of “space,” where the sun, moon, and stars exist, and “mesouraneema” refers to the area in the sky where the birds can fly!”

In various parts of your post you used the terms: “I assumed”, I figured”, “I came to the conclusion” and it is all “knowledge-based”. Sometimes our “knowledge” gets in the way of our ‘faith.” Do you know who the most difficult people are to share the gospel message with? The intellectuals of our day! Why? Because their knowledge gets in the way of their ability to have “faith” in the unknown. 1Co.8:1 says “knowledge puffeth up” now I’m not saying you are that way, just that it explains why knowledge can get in the way of faith.

Your words: “It’s the ONLY conclusion that makes any sense and remains consistent throughout! By the way, this gave rise to my test for new versions of the Bible: Matthew 16:1-4. Notice within the highlighted verses for “ouranos” above that the word is found FOUR times in three verses! However EVERY version of the Bible I’ve seen so far always translates the word as “heaven” in verse 1 and “sky” in verses 2 and 3. WHY IS THAT?! There is absolutely NO reason to suggest that they have two different meanings in the same passage! How would a Greek-speaking person of the first century make such a distinction?! (THINK ABOUT IT!)”

For the sake of brevity let’s just concern ourselves with this part:

NT:3772 ouranos (oo-ran-os'); perhaps from the same as NT:3735 (through the idea of elevation); the sky; by extension, heaven (as the abode of God); by implication, happiness, power, eternity; specifically, the Gospel (Christianity):
KJV - air, heaven ([-ly]), sky.

Now we see here that this one word can be used to describe multiple things (like the color green) but again let’s just concentrate on two, the sky and heaven (as the abode of God). When reading a biblical passage while doing a bible study it’s not as important to know what word is used as it is to know why it was used the way it was.

I’ll be the first to admit that the translators didn’t always get it right and when questions concerning context that don’t make “sense” arrive then further study is in order but we’ll assume regarding Matt. 16:1-4, they did.

Matt. 16:1-4 – “The Pharisees also with the Sadducees came, and tempting desired him that he would shew them a sign from heaven. 2 He answered and said unto them, When it is evening, ye say, It will be fair weather: for the sky is red. 3 And in the morning, It will be foul weather to day: for the sky is red and lowering. O ye hypocrites, ye can discern the face of the sky; but can ye not discern the signs of the times? 4 A wicked and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given unto it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas. And he left them, and departed.”

Ok, so if I put myself in a translators shoes how would I decide which word goes in its proper place? The next obvious question would then be, what is the context? What are the words before and after this point trying to say? So I’m not, at this moment, focusing on that one particular word, I’m focusing on all the other words surrounding it. At this point, Matt. 16:1, the words immediately prior are unhelpful because we’ve moved on to a different time and topic. So what do the words after say? Well, we see that Christ is obviously talking about the “sky” because of the colors of the sunrise and sunset and Christ says, speaking of the Pharisees, “ye can discern the face of the "ouranos”. So, we’ll translate “ouranos” here as ‘sky”. Ok, we know that the Pharisees and Sadducees have come to tempt him and asked for a sign. His reply tells us He knows they “know” the sky, so logically they must be asking for a sign from what they “don’t know” which would be heaven (as the abode of God), so we’ll translate “ouranos” as “heaven” here.

Anyways, I’m not a translator and have no knowledge of anything but modern day English but if I was worthy of such a task, this is how I imagine I would go about it.

In conclusion, I would say that our “knowledge” isn’t as important as the “sense” the Holy Spirit gives us while we are reading/studying. One shouldn’t need God or science to explain to us observable fact which is that the word ‘sky” can mean, where the birds fly and our upper atmosphere and the word “heaven” can mean, outer space and to a place beyond outer space or the abode of God. It makes absolutely NO sense to assume that the "abode of God is NEVER meant when the word "ouranos" is used.

Now when I read a passage like Rev. 4:1-2 – “After this I looked, and, behold, a door was opened in heaven: and the first voice which I heard was as it were of a trumpet talking with me; which said, Come up hither, and I will shew thee things which must be hereafter. 2 And immediately I was in the spirit: and, behold, a throne was set in heaven, and one sat on the throne.”

I don’t need to do a word search on what this talking about. The HS just lets me know that this is a place, it’s where God is, and there are different kinds of other objects, beings and creatures there as well. It’s not some vast part of a generic sky or space, it’s a specific location. At times like this, if it “makes sense” don’t stir the waters looking for another “sense”. Faith in God and what the HS tells us should trump our perceived knowledge every time. And believe it or not sometimes faith makes absolutely no sense at all, but at times, it’s all we have.

Hi Retro, Your words: “First of all, I never said that faith and the indwelling of the Ruach haQodesh is not important...It is WITHIN His guidance that I say that terminology is paramount!”

Sorry Retro but you didn’t include the first five highlighted words in your original statement. You just said “terminology was paramount” and my dictionary says paramount means of the highest importance which I took to mean that you were placing your knowledge above the HS or at least at the same level.

Your words: “So, having put my trust in God and relying on His Ruach haQodesh to guide me into all truth, I say again that we must take GREAT pains in our attention to the details when it comes to the terminology and the words used in the Bible!”

Because of the great amount of time since the original scriptures were written and the human factor of the translators I just don’t have the same regards towards terminology as you do. I don’t deny its importance but the ‘sense” of what I receive from the HS is more important to me than the actual wording.

Your words: “These factors we should already have “under our belts!” We should already be convinced of these factors and be in agreement on them. It is WITHIN the Ruach haQodesh’s influence and guidance and trust in a God of ultimate power and love to so guide us (the higher tier), that we THEN begin to discuss the importance of terminology within the Bible (the lower tier)!”

Agreed!

Your words: “Since when does God have an "abode?!” Listen again to Shlomoh’s (Solomon’s) words: 1 Kings 8:24 ???27 But will God indeed dwell on the earth? behold, the heaven and heaven of heavens cannot contain thee; how much less this house that I have builded? KJV

Does that sound like God has an “abode?” Theologically speaking, we say that God is “omnipresent”; that is, He is present everywhere! Since when does He have an abode? For any verse that you might have to show that God dwells in “heaven” I can show you many more verses that say that God dwells with His people IN THE LAND! For example:

Exodus 29:44-46http://biblia.com/bible/hcsb/Exodus 29.44-46 44 And I will sanctify the tabernacle of the congregation, and the altar: I will sanctify also both Aaron and his sons, to minister to me in the priest's office. 45 And I will dwell among the children of Israel, and will be their God. 46 And they shall know that I am the Lord their God, that brought them forth out of the land of Egypt, that I may dwell among them: I am the Lord their God. KJV

So, WHERE EXACTLY does God dwell?!”

I believe heaven is a very large earth-like planet. Everything on earth is a copy of what is in heaven but not everything from heaven is copied to earth. No, there are no scriptures that come out and say that but that is the sense I get. Does it have to “make” sense? Not to me. If you consider God’s omnipresence that acknowledges that God is everywhere at the same time, than the verse of God not being contained is of course true, but when I consider where God dwells, I look at it as ‘His base of operations.” In all your verses about God dwelling in the “land of Israel”, to answer your question, “where exactly does God dwell?” The answer is simple. Until the crucifixion of Christ, God “dwelt” in the Holy of Holies! Does that mean He was there 24/7? No, I guess you could consider it His layover spot, where He was there as needed. Of course it is possible that God in the guise of the HS was there 24/7.


You said, “Sounds to me like you DO "need to do a word search” or something! Don’t you yet understand that a “door opened in heaven” can either refer to a door on the top of a mountain or a door opened in the New Jerusalem? Of course it’s not talking about a “door” hovering in the sky! However, a mountain is frequently said to be in the sky, even in the Bible, and clouds can skirt the mountain to prove it!”

If heaven is a planet, it would have gardens, cities and buildings, etc. The following verse could be about the NJ but it could also be of a heavenly Jerusalem from which the NJ is copied.

Gal. 4:26 – “But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all.”

I don’t think you’re taking into consideration time in general. I think an argument could be given that until Adam & Eve sinned, it could be said that God “dwelt” in the garden. From the flood to the building of the tabernacle, we’re not really told where God dwelt although we know, for a time, it was around Melchisadek. Once the tabernacle was built until Christ’s crucifixion, He “dwelt” in the Holy of Holies. From that until the present, he “dwells” in the hearts and minds of believers. At some point in the future, heaven and the NJ will come to earth but I’m am not convinced that there will be a “gap” in the heavens where the NJ “used” to be. I would consider that location to be the “heaven of heavens” your 1 Kings 8:27 was referencing and if there are cities and a temple I can certainly imagine a door being there as well as a Mt Sion.

Psalm 11:4http://biblia.com/bible/hcsb/Psalm 11.4 4 The Lord is in his holy temple, the Lord's throne is in heaven: his eyes behold, his eyelids try, the children of men. KJV

This verse shows me that they knew God has a throne in heaven at the same time as He dwelt in the Holy of Holies here on earth.

Your words: “Since when do white horses fly? Revelation 19:14 14 And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean. KJV

Ever heard of the Pegasus? I don’t doubt your thoughts on the NJ but that is in the future, not now. If it’s just sitting out there in space where does the water come from and where does it go? The picture we are given doesn’t seem to apply to a space located city. One thing the bible never mentions in regards to the NJ is where are the angels? Where do they live? Would we or God even need them anymore? Perhaps because of their faithful service they inherit the planet of heaven as their home. Who knows! While I enjoy discussing this topic, I don’t think, because of all the unknowns, that it’s worth being contentious over. I can’t “prove” what I believe to be true anymore than we can “prove” to an atheist, the existence of God! It’s just something I believe by faith and if it’s untrue, it’s no big deal, I’m sure I’ll be just as happy in the presence of God, no matter where it is.