Heaven, again

So then, what exactly is "Heaven"? in the biblical sense?

Again, is N.T. Wright? There is no locale to which one can refer to as "heaven."

No Heaven?

So, Is NT Wright? That "heaven" is not our home?

I admit I am not a big fan of the Bishop of Durham, he can be interesting but when reading him I constantly feel like he is trying to avoid something, not sure what it is just yet.

Here is a key quote from the CT article linked above (really an excerpt from a book):

The traditional picture of people going to either heaven or hell as a one-stage, postmortem journey represents a serious distortion and diminution of the Christian hope. Bodily resurrection is not just one odd bit of that hope. It is the element that gives shape and meaning to the rest of the story of God's ultimate purposes. If we squeeze it to the margins, as many have done by implication, or indeed, if we leave it out altogether, as some have done quite explicitly, we don't just lose an extra feature, like buying a car that happens not to have electrically operated mirrors. We lose the central engine, which drives it and gives every other component its reason for working. [Italics mine]

Is it just me or it this a non-sequitur? (something that doesn't follow). How does the hope of heaven diminish the reality of the resurrection? It also seems like he is building a strawman argument because those who long for heaven do not downplay the hope of resurrection nor think they won't be . Its a both and. I understand he has a problem with people saying we'll be with God in heaven forever and that he is saying to be in heaven is to be with God - not in a particular location per se. Fine. However, all I see him doing is trying to redefine the terms and this really just confuses people rather than bring clarity, in my opinion.

Please feel free to dialogue with me about this. But to me this is one of the things NT Wright does best: build houses of cards with non-sequitors and straw man arguments.

What say you?