Are there 3 heavens?

Dartman

Well-Known Member
May 23, 2017
1,311
221
71
Washington
✟27,191.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
It is in the eleventh chapter. Paul talks about how he was beaten five times with 39 stripes (scrupulous Pharisees, following the law), three times he was beaten with rods, once he was stoned- this is hearkening back to what happened to St. Paul in Lystra by the Jews from Antioch.
Yes, the eleventh chapter DOES discuss MANY times Paul was persecuted. This is relevant to the point Paul began in the tenth chapter. Paul is reminding the Corinthians of his credibility. Paul is STILL addressing this issue in the 12th chapter. He has moved on from discussing his persecutions, to discussing visions and revelations, which add to his credibility ..... which MIGHT be misconstrued as bragging .... which is why Paul said;
2 Cor 12:1 It is not expedient for me doubtless to glory. I will come to visions and revelations of the Lord.
Paul's discussion of being beaten is NOT to be construed as the CAUSE of his visions.
 
Upvote 0

Sanoy

Well-Known Member
Apr 27, 2017
3,169
1,421
America
✟118,024.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
There are 4 other passages that discuss "New" heavens, and "New" earth. Isa 65:17, Isa 66:20, 2 Peter 3:5-13, and Rev 21-22. The word "heaven" isn't related to time .... "third" is. So is "new".
I don't derive time in 1 Kings 8.27. 1 Kings 8:27 doesn't contradict the fact that Jehovah/YHVH God is going to LEAVE the 3rd heaven, and come and dwell on the earth with the immortal righteous (Rev 21-22, Job 19:25-28, Psa 17:15, Matt 5:5 & 8)

The word "contain" in 1 Kings 8:27, means to restrict God.... like;
Jer 6:11 Therefore I am full of the fury of the Lord; I am weary with holding in:

God cannot be restricted to any temple, is Solomon's point.

"New" heaven is not using heaven as a time tense. It's using "New" as a self contained time tense, and heaven as a noun. "New" has an immediately contextual reference to tense. Third does not, so for it to be used as a tense it is Third-Heaven. There has to be some additional context to draw the meaning of this being a tensed identifier. Especially given the Biblical fact of multiple contemporaneous heavens as well as surrounding discussion of the belief in the second temple era. Just mentioning "new heaven" does not give warrant to "third-heaven" being an immediately tensed reference.

It's correct that the point is that God is not restricted to any temple, that point is made using what the hearer already knows about heaven, which is the fact that there are more than one contemporaneous heaven.
 
Upvote 0

Dartman

Well-Known Member
May 23, 2017
1,311
221
71
Washington
✟27,191.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
"New" heaven is not using heaven as a time tense. It's using "New" as a self contained time tense, and heaven as a noun. "New" has an immediately contextual reference to tense. Third does not, so for it to be used as a tense it is Third-Heaven. There has to be some additional context to draw the meaning of this being a tensed identifier. Especially given the Biblical fact of multiple contemporaneous heavens as well as surrounding discussion of the belief in the second temple era. Just mentioning "new heaven" does not give warrant to "third-heaven" being an immediately tensed reference.
What does "new" mean????

You claim that there is a "Biblical fact of multiple contemporaneous heavens" is a misunderstanding of Hebrewisms. The plural MERELY indicates vastness. That's all.
 
Upvote 0

Galatea

Well-Known Member
Oct 18, 2016
2,257
1,891
44
Alabama
✟70,081.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Yes, the eleventh chapter DOES discuss MANY times Paul was persecuted. This is relevant to the point Paul began in the tenth chapter. Paul is reminding the Corinthians of his credibility. Paul is STILL addressing this issue in the 12th chapter. He has moved on from discussing his persecutions, to discussing visions and revelations, which add to his credibility ..... which MIGHT be misconstrued as bragging .... which is why Paul said;
2 Cor 12:1 It is not expedient for me doubtless to glory. I will come to visions and revelations of the Lord.
Paul's discussion of being beaten is NOT to be construed as the CAUSE of his visions.
I think though, that he is saying he is not sure if he was in his body or out of his body when he had the experience of being caught up to the third heaven. I think most people believe he is talking about when he was left for dead in Lystra, that he had a near death experience.

He did not say "this is my vision". He said he was not sure whether he was in his body or not.

I know he is presenting his credentials as the Apostle to the Gentiles in these chapters.
 
Upvote 0

Sanoy

Well-Known Member
Apr 27, 2017
3,169
1,421
America
✟118,024.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
What does "new" mean????

You claim that there is a "Biblical fact of multiple contemporaneous heavens" is a misunderstanding of Hebrewisms. The plural MERELY indicates vastness. That's all.

Kings makes it clear there are multiple specific heavens.

From Wikipedia.
In the Old Testament the word shamayim represented both the sky/atmosphere, and the dwelling place of God.[31] The raqia or firmament - the visible sky - was a solid inverted bowl over the earth, coloured blue from the heavenly ocean above it.[32] Rain, snow, wind and hail were kept in storehouses outside the raqia, which had "windows" to allow them in - the waters for Noah's flood entered when the "windows of heaven" were opened.[33] Heaven extended down to and was coterminous with (i.e. it touched) the farthest edges of the earth (e.g. Deuteronomy 4:32);[34] humans looking up from earth saw the floor of heaven, which was made of clear blue lapis-lazuli (Exodus 24:9-10), as was God's throne (Ezekiel 1:26).[35]

Grammatically the word shamayim can be either dual (two) or plural (more than two), without ruling out the singular (one).[36] As a result, it is not clear whether there were one, two, or more heavens in the Old Testament,[37] but most likely there was only one, and phrases such as "heaven of heavens" were meant to stress the vastness of God's realm.[34]

We also know that Paul was contemporary with Judaic writing and discussion of multiple heavens. For example in the following books... 3 Baruch, 2 and 3 Enoch, the Testament of Levi, the Revelation of Moses, the Martyrdom and Ascension of Isaiah, the Apocalypse of St. Paul, and the Apocryphon of John. This lets us know that multiple heavens was apart of the discussion in the second temple era.

So we know the Jews believed in multiple levels/spheres of heaven. We know that Paul, a Jew, was contemporary with this knowledge. We know there is no use of a numerical heaven in the Bible to refer to tense. So why should we take it to be a previously unknown usage as tense here rather than the more likely and multiply present reference to the levels of heaven?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Dartman

Well-Known Member
May 23, 2017
1,311
221
71
Washington
✟27,191.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Kings makes it clear there are multiple specific heavens.
Why are you avoiding this point;
What does "new" mean????

Again, the claim that there is a "Biblical fact of multiple contemporaneous heavens" is a misunderstanding of Hebrewisms. The plural MERELY indicates vastness. That's all.

Sanoy said:
We also know that Paul was contemporary with Judaic writing and discussion of multiple heavens. For example in the following books... 3 Baruch, 2 and 3 Enoch, the Testament of Levi, the Revelation of Moses, the Martyrdom and Ascension of Isaiah, the Apocalypse of St. Paul, and the Apocryphon of John. This lets us know that multiple heavens was apart of the discussion in the second temple era.
No, the bizarre, non-Scriptural "Jewish Fables" are irrelevant to Paul's doctrine. If you cannot show where Paul preached a belief, you have no grounds to assume he beleived it.

Sanoy said:
We know there is no use of a numerical heaven in the Bible to refer to tense.
You are ignoring the meaning of "new", and the entire context of 2 Peter 3, and Rev 21-22
 
Upvote 0

Sanoy

Well-Known Member
Apr 27, 2017
3,169
1,421
America
✟118,024.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Why are you avoiding this point;
What does "new" mean????

Again, the claim that there is a "Biblical fact of multiple contemporaneous heavens" is a misunderstanding of Hebrewisms. The plural MERELY indicates vastness. That's all.

No, the bizarre, non-Scriptural "Jewish Fables" are irrelevant to Paul's doctrine. If you cannot show where Paul preached a belief, you have no grounds to assume he beleived it.

You are ignoring the meaning of "new", and the entire context of 2 Peter 3, and Rev 21-22

New means fresh, unused, novel. I didn't answer your question because I assumed it rhetorical but couldn't see the point. New is a self descriptive adjective applied to heaven in a tensed sense due to immediate context. "Third" is not a self descriptive tensed reference. It can apply in many ways.

I have given you the biblical scholarship on what heaven referred to. You have given me your opinion that it is a misunderstanding despite the the fact that we have second temple Jewish writing that understood heaven to be staged. I have also given scriptural referrence to multiple heavens. Heaven is used interchangeably to refer to all levels at once and specific levels, that is why it can mean a vast area.

The extrabiblical sources clearly show that Jewish belief included the belief in multiple spheres or levels of heaven. Not only does it inform us that the Jews believed in it, it shows they believed it in the same age as Paul was writing. Paul was also a Jew, born of a highly religions Jewish family of the Pharisee order so it is highly likely he would be aware of extra-biblical texts. Some Biblical scholars (Dr Heiser/Tyler Stewart) even suggest Paul is thinking of extra biblical Enoch in Galatians 3 and 4. In addition to extra biblical sources the idea is found in scripture like 1 Kings 8:27. The second temple era is surrounded in the belief of a staged heaven so we have a context of verbal understanding to a term like "3rd heaven". We have 0 context, Biblically or otherwise, of the phrase "3rd-heaven" referring to a tensed state or future heaven. None, at all. The term is never used to refer to the future heaven.

I find your idea logically coherent, I have no problem accepting it on conceptual grounds. But you have given me no exegetical pathway to substantiate why Paul would be referring to the future heaven instead of the immediately contextual-to-the-era Judaic belief of staged heavens. In contrast I have given you a mountain of historical reasons to take this verse as a staged heaven.

Unless you can lay out an exegetical path that is more likely true than traditional views on this verse it must remain secondary (though logically coherent) to traditional views. Possible, but less likely.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Dartman

Well-Known Member
May 23, 2017
1,311
221
71
Washington
✟27,191.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
New means fresh, unused, novel.
New stands in contrast to the current/previous.

2 Peter 3:5-7 For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water: 6 Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished:

THIS IS THE 1st HEAVEN AND EARTH.
Peter goes on to explain the 2nd "heaven and earth";

7 But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.

2 Peter 3:11-13 Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness, 12 Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat?

THEN PETER EXPLAINS THE 3rd "heaven and earth".. the NEW ones;

13 Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Sanoy

Well-Known Member
Apr 27, 2017
3,169
1,421
America
✟118,024.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
New stands in contrast to the current/previous.

2 Peter 3:5-7 For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water: 6 Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished:

THIS IS THE 1st HEAVEN AND EARTH.
Peter goes on to explain the 2nd "heaven and earth";

Your quoting of 2 Peter 3:5-7. Notice how it says "heavens" not "heaven". Also notice how the author does not refer to the prior heavens by a polar opposite of "new". For example "old heaven", or "present heaven". If "New Heaven" is supposed to refer to the 3rd heaven then why do we not see the same corresponding terminology in 2 Peter for the other two heavens?

Also second 2 Peter 2 uses 1Enoch for it's content. Enoch (though book 2) was one of the extra-biblical books I mentioned used a staged heaven.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Dartman

Well-Known Member
May 23, 2017
1,311
221
71
Washington
✟27,191.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Your quoting of 2 Peter 3:5-7. Notice how it says "heavens" not "heaven". Also notice how the author does not refer to the prior heavens by a polar opposite of "new". For example "old heaven",
Of course he does! "the heavens were of OLD" ... did you miss that??

Sanoy said:
.. or "present heaven".
Again, you seem to be refusing to read the text! "the heavens and the earth, which are NOW"
Sanoy said:
If "New Heaven" is supposed to refer to the 3rd heaven then why do we not see the same corresponding terminology in 2 Peter for the other two heavens?
We see OLD ... NOW .. and NEW!!! That's 3.

Sanoy said:
Also second 2 Peter 2 uses 1Enoch for it's content. Enoch (though book 2) was one of the extra-biblical books I mentioned used a staged heaven.
Peter is quoting from Enoch's actual prophecies, not the forgery we currently have, which naturally quotes Peter!

The Book of Enoch (also 1 Enoch;[1] Ge'ez: መጽሐፈ ሄኖክ mätṣḥäfä henok) is an ancient Jewish religious work, ascribed by tradition to Enoch, the great-grandfather of Noah, although modern scholars estimate the older sections (mainly in the Book of the Watchers) to date from about 300 BC, and the latest part (Book of Parables) probably to the first century BC.[2]

It is not part of the biblical canon as used by Jews, apart from Beta Israel. Most Christian denominations and traditions may accept the Books of Enoch as having some historical or theological interest, but they generally regard the Books of Enoch as non-canonical or non-inspired.
Book of Enoch - Wikipedia
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

paul becke

Regular Member
Site Supporter
Jul 12, 2003
4,011
814
83
Edinburgh, Scotland.
✟205,214.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Politics
UK-Labour
Read this about the mystics of Kibeho in Rwanda. The Catholic church is very conservative when it comes to official sanctioning of supernatural apparitions, etc, but Kibeho was very soon accorded the same status as Lourdes and Fatima. They were taken in the spirit to the heavenly realms ... and the outskirts of the not so heavenly realm.

VISIONS OF THE NETHERWORLD AT AFRICAN SITE
HEAVEN VISION

At the bottom of the page reached by the second link is an interesting account of heaven or its paradisial anteroom - the more joyful part of purgatory, it seems. Probably, where the Good Thief went.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Sanoy

Well-Known Member
Apr 27, 2017
3,169
1,421
America
✟118,024.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Of course he does! "the heavens were of OLD" ... did you miss that??

Again, you seem to be refusing to read the text! "the heavens and the earth, which are NOW"
We see OLD ... NOW .. and NEW!!! That's 3.

Peter is quoting from Enoch's actual prophecies, not the forgery we currently have, which naturally quotes Peter!

The Book of Enoch (also 1 Enoch;[1] Ge'ez: መጽሐፈ ሄኖክ mätṣḥäfä henok) is an ancient Jewish religious work, ascribed by tradition to Enoch, the great-grandfather of Noah, although modern scholars estimate the older sections (mainly in the Book of the Watchers) to date from about 300 BC, and the latest part (Book of Parables) probably to the first century BC.[2]

It is not part of the biblical canon as used by Jews, apart from Beta Israel. Most Christian denominations and traditions may accept the Books of Enoch as having some historical or theological interest, but they generally regard the Books of Enoch as non-canonical or non-inspired.
Book of Enoch - Wikipedia

"Now" is an adverb, not an adjective like "New". It's not "Now-heaven" It's "The heavens and earth which are now". It's not "old-heaven" either it's "The heavens were of old." Were being the tense not old.

I'm not refusing to read the text I'm actually letting it speak for itself like it should be allowed to do. Did you notice that the verse you quoted says "Heavens" plural?

I understand the Christian traditions of the Book of Enoch. I did not refer to them, but the Jewish belief in it. The quote you are taking from Wikipedia about Beta Israel is referring to the present. Notice how it doesn't link a reference to that statement? That is because we don't need one. Beta Israel uses it today because they used it a long time ago. Enoch 1 fell out of favor with the main body of Jews because it was messianic, just like the LLX.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Arthur B Via

Art
Site Supporter
Dec 26, 2016
141
94
68
33952
✟86,673.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Republican
It has been this man's firm conclusion to only accept what God tells us about all matters in His perfect living word. After reading hundreds of books and commentaries I've discovered they can be helpful in one's journey, but, only if they can be confirmed with God's word. All others that can't be confirmed? They're for the garbage can.
 
Upvote 0

Dartman

Well-Known Member
May 23, 2017
1,311
221
71
Washington
✟27,191.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
"Now" is an adverb, not an adjective like "New". It's not "Now-heaven" It's "The heavens and earth which are now".
The phrase "the heavens and earth which are now" is merely a long way of saying "current heavens".
Sanoy said:
It's not "old-heaven" either it's "The heavens were of old." Were being the tense not old.
"were" establishes past tense, "of old" establishes HOW past tense, and Peter's writing firmly establishes 3 distinct "heavens";
1) ..... "of old",
2) .... "are now"
3) .... "new"
Sanoy said:
I'm not refusing to read the text I'm actually letting it speak for itself like it should be allowed to do.
The attempts to explain it away, contradict this claim.

Sanoy said:
Did you notice that the verse you quoted says "Heavens" plural?
Of course. Plural denotes vastness.

Sanoy said:
I understand the Christian traditions of the Book of Enoch. I did not refer to them, but the Jewish belief in it. The quote you are taking from Wikipedia about Beta Israel is referring to the present. Notice how it doesn't link a reference to that statement? That is because we don't need one. Beta Israel uses it today because they used it a long time ago. Enoch 1 fell out of favor with the main body of Jews because it was messianic, just like the LLX.
The current book CALLED "Enoch" is a fake.
 
Upvote 0

Sanoy

Well-Known Member
Apr 27, 2017
3,169
1,421
America
✟118,024.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
The phrase "the heavens and earth which are now" is merely a long way of saying "current heavens". "were" establishes past tense, "of old" establishes HOW past tense, and Peter's writing firmly establishes 3 distinct "heavens";
1) ..... "of old",
2) .... "are now"
3) .... "new"
The attempts to explain it away, contradict this claim.

Of course. Plural denotes vastness.

The current book CALLED "Enoch" is a fake.
If you are saying "New-Heaven" is an actual tensed phrase then there needs to be the other two polar references to "New Heaven". You are purporting that there is a triplicate tensed system here with key words, one of which is "New-heaven", so where are the other two Key Phrases? They are missing. They are completely dissolved into basic sentences for which no Key phrase is present to inform the reader of the existence of this triplicate system of tensed reference.

The word here is in Greek NOT Hebrew. Strongs shows it to be Plural and Singular, not "vastness." Nevertheless it is translated Plural.

Jude explicitly states that the Book of Enoch contains prophecy. I prefer Jude over your assertion that it is "Fake".

You have still not given me an exegetical path to your interpretation. I remain on backorder for that as well as many of the other points I have made. All I get are assertions, misinterpreted quotes, and reconstructions of the text into invisible key phrases that do not exist as visible key phrases.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Dartman

Well-Known Member
May 23, 2017
1,311
221
71
Washington
✟27,191.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
If you are saying "New-Heaven" is an actual tensed phrase then there needs to be the other two polar references to "New Heaven". You are purporting that there is a triplicate tensed system here with key words, one of which is "New-heaven" so where are the other two Key Phrases? They are missing and completely dissolved into basic sentences.
The phrases are plainly in the context, and are clear.
The phrase "the heavens and earth which are now" is merely a long way of saying "current heavens". "were" establishes past tense, "of old" establishes HOW past tense, and Peter's writing firmly establishes 3 distinct "heavens";
1) ..... "of old", which is before the flood.
2) .... "are now", which are reserved for destruction by fire.
3) .... "new", which FOLLOWS the fire as explained clearly in 2 Peter 3, and in Rev 20 - 22.

Sanoy said:
The word here is in Greek NOT Hebrew. Strongs shows it to be Plural and Singular, not "vastness." Nevertheless it is translated Plural.
First, the author is Hebrew, and used the Greek language to express Hebrew thought.
Second, Strongs NEVER states the plural "is not vastness", that's your assertion.
Third, you have not provided a SINGLE passage that explains your theory of layered heavens... while 2 Peter 3, Rev 20-22, and Isa 65 and 66 explicitly discusses sequenced heavens.

Sanoy said:
Jude explicitly states that the Book of Enoch contains prophecy. I prefer Jude over your assertion that it is "Fake".
Jude quoted the REAL book of Enoch.... not the current fake. Jude is right, you're relying on a fake copy.

Sanoy said:
You have still not given me an exegetical path to your interpretation. I remain on backorder for that as well as many of the other points I have made. All I get are assertions, misinterpreted quotes, and reconstructions of the text into fictitious key phrases that do not exist as key phrases.
You are merely accusing me of your error.
 
Upvote 0

Sanoy

Well-Known Member
Apr 27, 2017
3,169
1,421
America
✟118,024.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
The phrases are plainly in the context, and are clear.
The phrase "the heavens and earth which are now" is merely a long way of saying "current heavens". "were" establishes past tense, "of old" establishes HOW past tense, and Peter's writing firmly establishes 3 distinct "heavens";
1) ..... "of old", which is before the flood.
2) .... "are now", which are reserved for destruction by fire.
3) .... "new", which FOLLOWS the fire as explained clearly in 2 Peter 3, and in Rev 20 - 22.

First, the author is Hebrew, and used the Greek language to express Hebrew thought.
Second, Strongs NEVER states the plural "is not vastness", that's your assertion.
Third, you have not provided a SINGLE passage that explains your theory of layered heavens... while 2 Peter 3, Rev 20-22, and Isa 65 and 66 explicitly discusses sequenced heavens.

Jude quoted the REAL book of Enoch.... not the current fake. Jude is right, you're relying on a fake copy.

You are merely accusing me of your error.

"the heavens and earth which are now" is not a catch phrase it is a sentence fragment. By your method I can turn any sentence fragment into a key phrase. For this to be a triplicate system the other two catch phrases should resemble the first catch phrase, not a sentence fragment.

The author is Hebrew, and as a Hebrew he would be knowledgeable of a staged heaven. Stongs doesn't mention it could refer to Giraffes either. What it doesn't mention is of no interest or value. The purpose of strongs is to state what it does mean. You say it means vastness, strongs doesn't...it is you who assert here.

I have given you a verse to support a staged heaven in kings 8:27. Want more? Here is a handful. It was one of many surrounding items that you ignore like biblical scholarship on the meaning of heaven and a whole host of surrounding textual material. You have given me nothing in response to this, nor anything to support your stance of a tensed heaven trichotomy beyond the same repeated verse.

The book of Enoch includes Judes quote. You just assert it's fake.

If you say my comments have been in error then deal with them rather than ignoring them. Don't just say it's wrong by assertion, show why it's wrong. And give me an exegetical pathway to your interpretation. I'm not interested in hearing more repetition of 2 Peter 3 again. I'm only interested in the exegetical process where we can derive a trichotomy of tensed catch phrases from it. This >"the heavens and earth which are now" is not a catch phrase okay. It's a fragment of a sentence.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Bible Highlighter

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.
Site Supporter
Jul 22, 2014
41,496
7,861
...
✟1,192,367.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
In the bible you hear of being caught up into the third heaven, which SUGGESTS that there must be a 1st and a 2nd heaven for a 3rd to exsist.

What are your thoughts and do you have scripture and reference to back up your opinion?

Three Heavens:

The Scripture mentions three heavens (2 Corinthians 12:2), and not just one.

The First Heaven:

The first heaven is earth's atmosphere where birds fly (Genesis 1:20, Jeremiah 4:25; 34:20,Lamentations 4:19, Zephaniah 1:3). One of the Hebrew words for 'heaven' is shamayim. This same word is translated as 'sky' in the Scripture, as can be seen by comparing Genesis 7:3, "fowls also of the air," with Genesis 7:23, "fowl of the heaven." The word 'sky' and 'heaven' are used interchangeably from the same Hebrew word (Psalm 8:8). So the first heaven is synonymous with 'heights' or 'elevations.'

Here are other examples to illustrate the first heaven. Exodus 19:20 says the Lord was on top of Mount Sinai when he called Moses up there, and God describes Mount Sinai as 'heaven' (Exodus 20:22, Deuteronomy 4:36). Here, everything above the ground is called 'heaven'.

Another example of the first heaven is in Amos 9:1-3, where God states that at the time of this judgment, nobody will be able to flee away (verse 1), even "though they climb up to heaven" (verse 2). This "heaven" is defined in the next verse, verse 3, as climbing to the top of Mount Carmel.

Another example is where the Scripture speaks of the "dew of heaven" (Genesis 27:28,39,Deuteronomy 33:28, Daniel 4:15-33; 5:21). The first heaven, from which dew comes, means the atmosphere, where the clouds and the wind roam. Therefore, everything above the ground is called 'heaven."

Another Hebrew word for the first heaven is 'shachaq.' This same word for heaven (Psalm 89:6,37) is also translated as 'sky' or 'skies' (Deuteronomy 33:26; Job 37:18; Psalm 18:11), and as 'clouds' (Job 35:5; 36:28; Psalm 36:5; 68:34, Pro. 3:20; 8:28).

The Second Heaven:

The second heaven is outer space where the planets and stars exist (Genesis 1:14-17; 15:5;22:17; 26:4, Deuteronomy 1:10; 17:3; Psalm 8:3, Jeremiah 8:2; Matthew 24:29). Usually the term "host of heaven" or "firmament of the heaven" is used to describe this second heaven.

The Third Heaven:

The third heaven is literally called "the third heaven" in 2 Corinthians 12:2. This third heaven is what Christ calls his "Father's house" (John 14:2), and both Christ and the Apostle Paul calls it "paradise" (Luke 23:43, 2 Corinthians 12:2-4, Revelation 2:7). This is where God and the heavenly sanctuary exist (1 Peter 3:22). This third heaven is also known as the "heaven of heavens" (Deuteronomy 10:14; 1 Kings 8:27, 2 Chronicles 2:6; 6:18, Nehemiah 9:6, Psalms 148:4), "The heavenly Jerusalem" (Galatians 4: 26; Hebrews 12:22; Revelation 3:12), the "kingdom of heaven" (Matthew 25:1, James 2:5), the "eternal kingdom" (2 Peter 1:11), the "eternal inheritance" (1 Peter. 1:4, Hebrews 9:15), and the "better country" (Hebrews 11:14,16). The fact that there are more than one 'heaven' can be shown by Psalm 115:16, "The heaven, even the heavens, are the LORD'S." There are obviously two different 'heavens' being addressed in this one verse.

Since Elijah could not have gone to the heaven of God's throne, then to which heaven did he go? He was not taken to God's heavenly throne (as some imagine). He was actually taken into this earth's atmosphere, the first heaven. There could be no whirlwind in any other place but in the atmosphere surrounding this earth.


Source Used:
Elijah, Enoch, and Moses
Important Note: Although I quoted part of this article to help explain the three heavens, I do not agree with their interpretation of on Enoch. I believe Enoch was translated or spiritually taken by God and did not see death (as the Scriptures say). So not all the views expressed at this website reflect my views on the Scriptures.


...
 
Upvote 0

Mafeking

Mafeking
May 29, 2013
31
8
I live the Greater Toronto Area of Canadae
Visit site
✟8,223.00
Country
Canada
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Single
Politics
CA-Others
In the bible you hear of being caught up into the third heaven, which SUGGESTS that there must be a 1st and a 2nd heaven for a 3rd to exsist.

What are your thoughts and do you have scripture and reference to back up your opinion?

The only Scriptural evidence of more than one heaven is the one you quoted. But we have heard that we have the firmament as one heaven. The Starry Heavens is another, and finally the heaven of heavens which is considered the dwelling place of the Great Creator. On the things the Bible does not explain we should be silent and not indulge in wild and unwise speculations.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

miknik5

"Let not your heart be troubled"
Jun 9, 2016
15,725
2,781
USA
✟101,174.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Can someone explain what is the point of our discussing three heavens when ultimately the firmament, which separates the waters above from the waters below (when and only when all the vessels are marked holy to GOD), will be removed...
 
Upvote 0