Good lenses are expensive so should not be on whim. My suggestion would be to start with the kit of D7000 and 18-105vr That one has a wide enough range to let you learn and experiment on different subjects and shooting styles. You may find that your shooting is more portraits or candids so you would want your first great lens to probably be a prime in the range of focal length your portraits were taken at with the 18-105vr, like a 85mm 1.8, the new 85 1.4, a 105mm, or 70-200vr 2.8 zoom. I you find that you get the most use out of the wide end, for landscape or architecture, a ultra-wide like the 10-24, 10-20, 11-16 would be high on your list. You will probably end up with one or more of the Trinity, Nikon's highly regarded f/2.8 zooms: 14-24(not really wide enough for DX but stunning in results),24-70(great mid zoom that is a little too long at 24 on DX but an excellent portrait and general purpose lens) and the most popular of the 3, 70-200VR which is a must have for most photographers. Nikon makes a DX version of mid zoom, 17-55 2.8. It is not as good optically as the 24-70 but is less expensive and offers a very practical range. I have it, but find that my most often needed range is longer than 24 so I plan on selling the 17-55 to get a used 24-70, since many of my events shots are in the 24-70 range, the rest are covered by the 70-200 perfectly. Most people would probably like the 17-55 range better however. This illustrates why you should learn the camera and your style for a while before investing in good lenses. What is good on average might miss you YOUR style most demands, until you know what subjects you gravitate towards, you might collect a lot of expensive glass that sits in the bag. In my own case I got the camera to do studio style fashion shots for my GF, a designer. After setting up a good home made studio I found (after about 2,000 shots) that I liked portrait and candids, and later event shooting. These required a different orientation is lens collecting. Some of my most expensive lenses literally sit collecting dust. My cheapest lenses; 35 1.8 and 50 1.8 get a lot of use but the one that has 30,000 frames is the 70-200. My 85 1.4D seldom is used, nor the 17-55, although both are great lenses that others would love to shoot with all the time.
Consider the flash. A good flash(Nikon's flash system is famous as the best in the industry and a good reason to select Nikon) greatly extends the usefulness of lower cost lenses, and your whole range of shooting options. The SB600, 700 and 900 are useful everyday, even in broad daylight. It more than any other item in your kit has the biggest impact on your range of shooting option. When there is a enough light, of which the quality of the light in under you control, you can stop down the 18-105 into its sweet spots in aperture and get images that will surprise people who assume cheap lenses are not sharp. Learning proper use of the flash(it is really easy with the Nikon CLS compatible speedlights) really returns more in results than its cost by a wide margin. You will read people reporting they only want ambient light to avoid the "flash look". That is only because they do not understand how to use it. But those same people marvel at the images in fashion, fine art, glamor etc galleries yet almost all where taken with flash. Shooting only with available light means most of the time you will be waiting for good light conditions to come. Good natural light and desired subjects work on different and independent time scales. By having the option to augment the light totally under your own control, lighting becomes your friend and creative tool, not challenger. Good choice of the d7000, which looks to be another Nikon mid level classic in the making. The definition of "mid level" has changed radically. The performance of this new $1200 camera is better in almost all respects except build strength that top pro cameras just 5 years ago that were $5000 in dollars that were worth more. Stan St Petersburg Russia