Q. I tend to take the foundations of heaven & the earth physically because the Bible mentioned that there will be a new heaven and a new earth, unless new heaven and new earth means another dimension closer to God’s.
A. Yes the Bible referred to new heaven(s) & a new earth in two passages:
• 2 Pet 3:11 But according to His promise we are looking for new heavens and a new earth, in which righteousness dwells.
• Rev 21:1 Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth; for the first heaven and the first earth passed away, and there is no longer any sea.
The new heaven and new earth are physical, because the new Jerusalem & its foundation stones are physical:
• Rev 21:14 And the wall of the city had twelve foundation stones, and on them were the twelve names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb.
• Rev 21:19 The foundation stones of the city wall were adorned with every kind of precious stone. The first foundation stone was jasper; the second, sapphire; the third, chalcedony; the fourth, emerald;
But while the first heaven & first earth are physical, that does not automatically mean their “foundations” are physical. Go over the 7 appearances of the term “foundations of the earth” in the Bible again. Insert your physical interpretation, say the tectonic plates on which the continents rest, & see if it would fit e.g.
• Ps 82:5 They do not know nor do they understand; They walk about in darkness; All the foundations of the earth are shaken – They (kings & judges) walk about in darkness; the tectonic plates are shaken. What does the former have to do with the latter?
• Prov 8:29 When He set for the sea its boundary So that the water would not transgress His command, When He marked out the foundations of the earth – So that the water (the sea) would not transgress God’s command, when He marked out the tectonic plates. But much of the tectonic plates are submerged under the sea. They don’t set the boundary or shore line!
Try substituting “tectonic plates” for “foundations of the earth” in the other 5 occurrences:
While a physical interpretation could fit Isa 24:18 or 51:13, it wouldn’t fit the others. Remember, unlike a figurative interpretation which could be different depending on the context, a literal interpretation has to be consistent in all the passages. That just would not do. That’s why I said the meaning is figurative. Think it through carefully.