Burning Away Misconceptions About “Holy Fire” - by Lyndon Unger

Originally found here. Our comments in bold.
--------------------

We'll save our analysis until the end because we want to illustrate how the authors strategic use of biblical references clears the way for him to draw his flawed conclusions. 

The author claims, "I guess I do all this work so that you don’t have to." However, you will note that the author rarely quotes actual Scripture. It seems to us that if one is trying to make a case from Scripture, Scripture ought to actually appear in the presentation. Dear reader, if you take the time to examine provided Scripture references for yourself, you will discover that he is not quoting them because they don't support his opinion.   

One might justifiably conclude that the author is looking for support for his preconceived notions. He mission is to prove charismatics wrong about their position on fire, and he will not allow inconvenient Scripture to impede him.
-------------------------------------

If you weren’t born into a Christian home and came to know the Lord a little later in life, you may remember your first experiences with “Christian Culture”. You discovered a whole bunch of bands that you’d never heard of, a whole new realm of celebrities, and a bunch of strange new language. Words that used to be somewhat acceptable were now taboo (i.e. certain terms associated with the bathroom), words that you never heard previously became part of your vocabulary (i.e. “Calvinism” or “eschatology”), and words that used to mean one thing now meant something else entirely (i.e. “charismatic” or “world”). If you entered the faith via a Charismatic church (like me), one of the most quickly re-defined terms was “fire”.

“Fire” used to be what you called the results of tossing a match on something flammable, or maybe something you did with a gun. Now it meant something way different. In Charismatic circles, there is often talk about “fire” of some sort: Holy Fire, Divine Fire, Heavenly Fire, the Fire of God, etc. The idea of “fire” is basically paralleled with one or more of the following ideas: spiritual passion, having an emotionally intense worship/church service, really “getting serious” with God (or some form of personal revival), or some sort of outpouring of divine power on a person/church meeting/event resulting in a renewed passion of some sort (i.e. evangelism) or various “manifestations” of the Holy Spirit (i.e. euphoria, tongues, healings, prophecies, “miracles”, holy laughter, holy glue, holy vomiting, barking, crying, being slain/laid out in the spirit, visions, trances, screaming, physical pain, teleportation, etc.). I had generally gone along with the Charismatic usage of the term “fire” with regards to passion or zeal, and not really questioned it since the term is often used in non-Charismatic circles in nearly identical ways. But, as I’ve grown in my knowledge of the Lord and his word I’ve found myself continually questioning my own assumptions and understandings and going “back to the drawing board”.

When we speak of “fire” in the previously mentioned ways, are we using the term in a proper Biblical sense? There’s only one real way to objectively answer the question. Let’s plug through all 430 occurrences of “fire” in the ESV (and let’s be honest: most people who use the term aren’t doing original language exegesis):

1. There are many references to physical fire (the kind that firefighters need to put out) in the Scripture:

Genesis 22:6-7,
Exodus 12:8, 22:6, 27:3, 29:14, 29:34, 32:20, 32:34, 35:3, 38:3;
Leviticus 1:7-8, 1:12, 1:17, 2:14, 3:5, 4:12, 6:9-10, 6:12-13, 6:30, 7:17, 7:19, 8:17, 8:32, 9:11, 10:1, 13:52, 13:55, 13:57, 16:12-13, 16:27, 19:6, 20:14, 21:9;
Numbers 3:4, 4:14, 6:18, 16:7, 16:18, 16:37, 16:46, 18:9, 19:6, 26:61, 31:10, 31:23,
Deuteronomy 7:5, 7:25, 9:21, 12:3, 12:31, 13:16,
Joshua 6:24, 7:15, 7:25, 8:8, 8:19, 11:6, 11:9, 11:11, 13:14,
Judges 1:8, 6:21, 9:15, 9:20, 9:49, 9:52, 12:1, 14:15, 15:5-6, 15:14, 16:19, 18:27, 20:48,
1 Samuel 2:28, 30:1, 30:3, 30:14,
2 Samuel 14:30-31, 22:9, 22:13, 23:7;
1 Kings 7:50, 9:16, 16:18, 18:23, 18:24-25, 19:12; 2
Kings 1:14, 8:12, 17:31, 19:18, 23:11, 25:15,
2 Chronicles 4:22, 16:14, 21:19, 35:13, 36:19;
Nehemiah 1:3, 2:3, 2:13; Job 22:20, 28:5, 31:12, 41:19,
Psalm 11:6, 18:8, 18:12-13, 21:9, 46:9, 68:12, 74:7, 78:63, 80:16, 83:14, 118:12, 140:10, 148:8;
Proverbs 6:27, 26:18, 26:20-21, 30:16
Isaiah 1:7, 5:24, 7:4, 9:5, 9:19, 10:16, 27:11, 30:14, 30:33, 33:12, 37:19, 44:15-16, 44:19, 47:14, 54:16, 64:2, 64:11, 66:24
Jeremiah 6:29, 7:18, 7:31, 19:5, 22:7; 29:22, 32:29, 34:2, 34:22, 36:22, 36:23, 36:32, 37:8, 37:10, 38:17, 38:23, 43:12-13, 49:2, 51:32, 51:58, 52:19
Ezekiel 1:4, 1:13, 1:27, 5:2, 8:2, 10:6, 10:7, 15:4-6, 16:21; 20:31, 22:20, 23:25, 24:10, 24:12, 28:14, 28:16, 30:8, 30:14, 30:16, 38:22, 39:9-10,
Daniel 3:22, 3:24-27, 7:9-11
Hosea 7:4
Joel 2:30
Micah 1:4
Nahum 1:6
Zechariah 9:4
Malachi 1:10; 3:2
Matthew 3:10-12, (emphasis added) 5:22, 7:19, 13:40, 17:15, 18:8-9, 25:41
Mark 9:22, 9:43, 9:48-49, (emphasis added) 14:54
Luke 3:9, 3:16-17, 9:54, 17:29, 22:55
John 15:6, 18:18, 21:9
Acts 2:3, (emphasis added) 2:19, 28:2-3, 28:5
Hebrews 11:34
James 3:5, 5:3
Revelation 8:5, 8:7, 8:8, 10:1, 11:5, 13:13, 14:10, 15:2, 16:8.

Anticipating objections to some of those, I’d say that there are some occurrences where “fire” is used in a metaphor, but the term “fire” itself isn’t being used as a metaphor for something else (i.e. in a simile where something is “hot like fire”, the fire being referred to isn’t itself metaphorical for something else).

2. God’s physical presence is often manifest in some sort of physical fire (at least in appearance) in the Bible:

a. God appears as a fire pot (Genesis 15:17).
b. Jesus appears as fire in (Exodus 3:2; Acts 7:30). I know what you’re thinking. You’re thinking that the text says “the angel of the Lord”, not Jesus. Well, they’re the same person. Secondly, you’re thinking “well, the bush wasn’t burned so it obviously wasn’t physical fire”. I’d dare suggest that it sure looked like real, physical fire…hence Moses saw it and wondered why the bush wasn’t burned (Exodus 3:3). The strange thing about the fire wasn’t it’s (sic) appearance, but rather that it didn’t burn the bush.
c. as a pillar of fire during the Exodus (Exodus 13:21-22, 14:24, 40:38; Numbers 9:15-16, 14:14; Deuteronomy 1:33; Nehemiah 9:12, 9:19; Psalm 105:39). I’d dare say that the fire actually looked like “real” fire.
d. God appeared as fire on Mount Sinai (Exodus 19:18, 24:17; Deuteronomy 4:11-12, 4:15, 4:33, 4:36, 5:4, 5:22-25, 9:10, 9:15, 10:4; 18:16; Isaiah 4:5;
e. God himself lit the first offering in the tabernacle with fire (Leviticus 9:24).
f. God himself lit the first offering in the temple with fire (2 Chronicles 7:1, 7:3).
g. God himself lit David’s offering upon altar on the threshing floor of Ornan the Jebusite (1 Chronicles 21:26).
h. God’s flaming chariots, pulled by flaming horses, separated Elijah from Elisha as Elijah ascended to Heaven in a whirlwind (2 Kings 2:11). It’s worth noting that the flaming horses/chariots kept Elisha away from the whirlwind (and the holy ground that it touched down on). Interesting detail indeed.
i. Those same flaming chariots and flaming horses appeared a second time in Elisha’s life; when Elisha’s servant had his eyes opened to see the armies of the Lord defending Elisha at Dothan (2 Kings 6:17). Now arguably, nobody knows if this was actually physical fire, but the fire was described in that way.
j. In the future, God will defend Israel from their enemies by appearing as (among other things) fire (Isaiah 29:6; Revelation 20:9).
k. The Holy Spirit manifested as seven torches (for the seven churches) in the book of Revelation (Revelation 4:5). There are questions about the appearance here, but I should point out that this one verse doesn’t exactly overturn the established pattern we’ve seen so far.

3. God’s judgment is often performed with physical fire:

a. God rained down fire on Sodom and Gomorrah in (Genesis 19:24).
b. The seventh plague in Egypt was one of hail and fire (Exodus 9:23-24).
c. God killed Nadab and Abihu with fire (Leviticus 10:2).
d. God killed some of the complaining Israelites with fire (Numbers 11:1-3).
e. God killed the 250 men offering incense in Korah’s rebellion with fire (Numbers 16:35, 26:10; Psalm 106:18).
f. God killed the 50 men sent to get Elijah with fire (2 Kings 1:10) twice (2 Kings 1:12).
g. God killed all Job’s sheep and servants with fire (Job 1:16).
h. God proves himself as God and sentences the prophets of Ba’al to death by raining fire down from Heaven on the altar of Elijah (1 Kings 18:38).
i. God’s eschatological judgment of sinners/creation will be performed with fire (2 Thessalonians 1:8; Hebrews 10:27; James 3:6; 2 Peter 3:7, 3:12; Jude 1:7; Revelation 19:20, 20:10, 20:14-15, 21:8). Though there most certainly is debate with regards to the physical nature of the fire, the usage of the term “fire” is not clearly metaphorical in the listed passages. Exploration of this issue is beyond the scope of this post and is, in and of itself, a rather large post.

4. Fire is used as a relatively wide-ranging metaphor several times in the scripture:

a. The consuming nature of fire is used as a metaphor for destruction/desolateness, either by God or Men (Numbers 21:28, 21:30; Deuteronomy 9:3; Job 20:26; Psalm 97:3; Isaiah 10:17; 26:11, Jeremiah 48:5, 49:27, 50:32, 51:30; Joel 1:19-20, 2:3; Obadiah 1:18; Micah 1:7; Nahum 3:13, 3:15; Habakkuk 2:13; Revelation 17:16).
b. The consuming nature of fire is used as a metaphor for God’s jealousy for his own glory and worship (Deuteronomy 4:24; Psalm 79:5, 89:46; Hebrews 12:29).
c. Fire is used as a metaphor for God’s judgment/wrath (Deuteronomy 33:2; Psalm 50:3, 78:21; Isaiah 30:30, 31:9; 33:14, 42:25, 66:15-16; Jeremiah 4:4, 11:16, 15:14, 17:14, 17:27, 21:10, 21:12, 21:14; Lamentations 2:3, 4:11; Ezekiel 5:4, 15:7, 19:12, 19:14, 20:47, 21:31, 21:32, 22:21, 22:31, 28:18, 39:6; Hosea 8:14; Amos 1;4, 1:7, 1:10, 1:12, 1:14, 2:2, 2:5, 5:6, 7:4; Zephaniah 1:18; 3:8; Zechariah 3:2, 11:1; Luke 12:49; Jude 1:23; Revelation 14:18, 18:8). The fire in this metaphor is certainly physical fire.
d. The consuming nature of fire is used as a metaphor to describe how wealth acquired through bribery doesn’t last (Job 15:34).
e. The extinguishing of a fire (or candle) is used as a metaphor for the fleeting nature of the life of the wicked (Job 18:5).
f. The voice/words of the Lord are compared with fire. The idea here is that the voice of the Lord flashes forth and strikes fear (Psalm 29:7) or consumes those who hear it (Jeremiah 5:14)
g. Fire is used as a metaphor for anger (Psalm 39:3; Lamentations 2:4; Hosea 7:6). The idea here is that anger consumes one just like fire consumes that which it burns.
h. Fire is used as a metaphor for suffering (Psalm 66:12; Isaiah 43:2; Lamentations 1:13; Zechariah 13:9; 2 Peter 1:7; (emphasis added) Revelation 3:18).
i. Fire is used metaphorically to (arguably) describe something that cannot be stopped (Psalm 104:4; Jeremiah 20:9; Joel 2:5; Hebrews 1:7).
j. The destroying/consuming nature of fire is used as a metaphor for the speech of the wicked (Proverbs 16:27; James 3:6).
k. A lover’s consuming jealousy is compared with fire (Song of Solomon 8:6).
l. Fire is used as a metaphor for the consuming nature wickedness (Isaiah 9:18, 33:11, 65:5).
m. The consuming nature of fire is used as a metaphor for the tongue of the Lord (Isaiah 30:27).
n. The illuminating nature of fire is used as a metaphor for wisdom (Isaiah 50:11).
o. God’s word is compared to a fire (Jeremiah 23:29).
p. Fire is used as a metaphor of impenetrability (Zechariah 2:5).
q. Fire is used as a metaphor for testing (1 Corinthians 3:13, 3:15).
r. Fire is used as a metaphor for the eyes of Christ (Revelation 1:14, 2:18, 19:12).
s. Fire is used as a metaphor for a plague (Revelation 9:17-18).

Wow. That was a lot of passages!

I guess I do all this work so that you don’t have to…and before anyone complains, I’m sure that I wrongly classified a few references, mostly because of the question of whether “fire” itself was being used as a metaphor or a literal component of a metaphor. I didn’t spend a ton of time looking at some of the difficult texts, but the pattern is obviously established.

For those that are interested (and I know someone will complain about this if I don’t mention it), I also checked the original languages and the Hebrew word for fire (‘esh) occurs 373 times in the Old Testament (which is actually more occurrences than in the ESV, but mostly because it’s sometimes translated “fiery” or “burning” or something like that), and the Greek (pyr) occurs 73 times (again, more occurrences than in the ESV, for identical reasons). That works out to 16 more occurrences than the ESV, so on a list of 430 references; that’s a fairly insignificant percentage (3.72%).

Points to take home:

1. The Spirit (who authored Scripture) never, ever, uses “fire” in a metaphorical sense describing passion/excitement/commitment/fervor etc. The only metaphorical usages related to emotions are of anger and wrath (Emphasis added.).  That’s amazingly interesting, given the constant usage of the term in Charismatic circles. I have rarely heard a Charismatic/Continuationist use the idea of “holy fire” in reference to God’s wrath or anger. I know what you’re thinking though… I know that getting “fired up/being on fire” is an English expression of speech, but that leads to the second point.

2. The Spirit never, ever, uses “fire” in the context of cultivation of spiritual renewal/fervor/conviction (Emphasis added.). There’s never talk of “Holy Fire” in the scriptures, at least in the sense that the phrase is regularly used in charismatic circles. The phrase doesn’t even appear in the Scriptures at all.

Nowhere. Write it down (Emphasis added.).

All this talk about “holy fire” isn’t talking about actually burning things, God manifesting his presence in physical fire, divine judgment, or any of the metaphorical uses in scripture. When people talk about “holy fire”, they’re not talking about God raining down judgment on his enemies.

So, who cares, right?

Well, consider two things:

1. When a person conflates biblical terminology and idioms with modern terminology and idioms, they twist the scriptures.

In other words, when a person takes verses like Matthew 3:11 (emphasis added) as some sort of teaching that the Holy Spirit will give a person an intense emotional excitement/religious sincerity/fervor for God (or as a promise for the manifestation of sign gifts in a church event/service/meting), one is either mishandling or misunderstanding the scripture. That’s not a light charge, and people who teach such things will be judged for their error (James 3:1)

But wait! There’s more!

2. If you pray for God’s “fire” in your life and experience suffering, God’s giving you exactly what you asked for (Psalm 66:12; Isaiah 43:2; Lamentations 1:13; Zechariah 13:9; 1 Corinthians 3:13, 3:15; 2 Peter 1:7; Revelation 3:18). (This is an egregious assertion. God is not capricious or arbitrary, looking to pounce on someone for praying the wrong thing.)

If you think God’s not faithfully answering your prayers just because you don’t have an increase in passion or you don’t speak in tongues, you’re sadly mistaken.

Until now, you may have been misinformed and speaking out of an assumed tradition or ignorance, asking God for something you didn’t mean to ask for, and then responded in confusion when he didn’t give you what you meant to ask for (but didn’t actually request).

Now you’re informed, and all your excuses just melted.

God’s far more faithful than we give him credit for, and we’re often a lot more ignorant than we’re willing to admit.

***Please stop talking about the Holy Spirit in language that he never uses of himself.*** Please stop spreading lies about the Holy Spirit. That’s otherwise known as “blaspheming” (and no, I’m not talking about “the unforgivable sin”…) If you want more love for God, how about you just ask for more love for God? If you want more passion, how about you just ask for more passion? If you want more experiences of tongues, how about you just ask for tongues? Don’t ask for more “holy fire” in your life; you might get cancer when God answers your prayers (Emphasis added.).
-----------------------------

The author's unequivocal position is that fire is never used in the Bible to describe anything positive, like passion, fervor, or commitment. To those we would add purity and holiness, not mentioned in the article. So, he concludes that the fire of God is never desirable. "Nowhere. Write it down." 

Let's explore the idea that fire is never applied to positive workings of God in the believer. 

1) First Scripture emphasized above:

Mt. 3:11 I baptize you with water for repentance. But after me will come one who is more powerful than I, whose sandals I am not fit to carry. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire.

The author complains: 

...when a person takes verses like Matthew 3:11 as some sort of teaching that the Holy Spirit will give a person an intense emotional excitement/religious sincerity/fervor for God (or as a promise for the manifestation of sign gifts in a church event/service/meting), one is either mishandling or misunderstanding the scripture. 

The author has glibly told us we are mishandling Scripture but he does not tell us what he thinks it really means. A summary denial provides neither instruction nor rhetorical support for one's position. Why doesn't he tell us what it does mean?

We are left to examine it ourselves. First we see that John the Baptist notes the superiority of Jesus' baptism. This baptism is much better than John's baptism, because it is from Jesus. He's more powerful, so it's more powerful. It's a better thing for us. 

Both fire and the baptism of the Holy Spirit are mentioned together. Considering the sublimely positive gift that is the Holy Spirit, it is reasonable to conclude that the coupling of the baptism of the Holy Spirit with fire is good.

This baptism of the Holy Spirit is so important that Peter references it in his testimony (Acts 11:16). He doesn't include "with fire," but then, neither did Mark (Mark 1:8). Clearly there is something notable about this baptism. 

We can safely assert that this baptism is positive.

2) Next emphasized verse:

Mk. 9:49-50 Everyone will be salted with fire. Salt is good, but if it loses its saltiness, how can you make it salty again? Have salt in yourselves, and be at peace with each other.

This fascinating passage is the subject of much speculation, given that it appears just after an extended explanation of the perils of hell. One might connect it with that concept, but it is an uncertain passage, and not everyone does connect it with hell:

Bratcher and Nida have counted at least 15 different explanations for the verse, and Gould calls it 'one of the most difficult to interpret in the New Testament.' He connects the saying not with the fire of judgment in the preceding context, but with the idea of purification as in the fire of a sacrifice. This is because both fire and salt were used by the Jews in their Temple sacrifices. According to the Mishnah, salt was put into the carcass of the sacrificial animal in order to soak out the blood. After the blood was soaked out, the carcass was fit for consumption or sacrifice: 'The priest. . . dried it by rubbing salt on it [the carcass of the sacrificial animal] and cast it on the fire.'

We need to particularly note that "everyone will be salted with fire." Everyone. Clearly and unequivocally, we will all experience this. "Salt is good." Therefore, it is good to be salted with fire. It would be ridiculous to claim that we are all going to be punished via fire; remember, the author insists this is the sole purpose of fire. 

We would venture to say that what we will experience is what Paul tells us: 

...his work will be shown for what it is, because the Day will bring it to light. It will be revealed with fire, and the fire will test the quality of each man’s work. If what he has built survives, he will receive his reward. 1Co. 3:13-14 

"Each man" will experience this fire. We certainly are glad for this fire. It's not a fire of punishment. I'm hoping that something of eternal worth will come out of this life of mine on earth. Treasure in heaven!

As an aside, sacrifices are offered with fire. Again, not a punishment. Metaphorically speaking, we still offer sacrifices to God. 

Ro. 12:1: ...in view of God’s mercy, to offer your bodies as living sacrifices, holy and pleasing to God — this is your spiritual act of worship.  

So, might we conclude that being "baptized with fire" and being "salted with fire" are expressions of a process or event in the lives of believers associated with sanctification, purity, or walking more properly with God (Gal. 5:25)? These would be positive fire associations for the believer, wouldn't they?

3) Next verse, Ac. 2:3-4: 

They saw what seemed to be tongues of fire that separated and came to rest on each of them. All of them were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit enabled them. 

Cessationists do not like this passage, and have gone to great lengths to explain it away. They especially do not like the idea that the presence of the Holy Spirit led to odd behavior, let alone a positive change in someone's life today. So we can understand why the author doesn't want to quote it.

Note that the symbolism of fire here is not a negative thing. It doesn't indicate God's judgment or anger. This fire is equated to the Holy Spirit and His power in the lives of those people. It is not my purpose to enter the debate regarding the Holy Spirit in the Church today. We only intend to point out that it is passages like this that negate the author's thesis.

4) Next is 1 Pe. 1:6-7:

"In this you greatly rejoice, though now for a little while you may have had to suffer grief in all kinds of trials. These have come so that your faith — of greater worth than gold, which perishes even though refined by fire — may be proved genuine and may result in praise, glory and honor when Jesus Christ is revealed." 

The author provides us with an interpretation, which is nice for a change. He describes the fire in this passage as being a "metaphor for suffering," but it clearly isn't. Read it again. The fire is a metaphor for the process of refining, purity, or holiness, a desirable thing we ought to embrace. The difficulties of life refine us like fire refines gold to produce something pure, valuable,  and tested. This verse ties in closely to 1Co. 3:13 discussed above.

***

Ok, now that we've examined the Scriptures that languished for lack of quoting and/or explanation, we now turn to the important Scriptural omissions. 

First, 1 Th. 5:19: 

Do not put out the Spirit’s fire.

 Whoops. Here's a glaring omission by the author. Clearly this is not referring to the fire of judgment, for it appears in a list of preferred behaviors, like joy, prayer, thankfulness, and avoiding evil.  This fire is some sort of positive, desirable work of God in our lives. And, we apparently can quench this fire, but should not. 

Next,  2 Ti. 1:6-7: 

For this reason I remind you to fan into flame the gift of God, which is in you through the laying on of my hands. For God did not give us a spirit of timidity, but a spirit of power, of love and of self-discipline.

This would be the opposite of putting out the Spirit's fire. It is obtained by an impartation, facilitated by the laying on of hands, and has spiritual benefits and spiritual fruit.

"Timidity" is the Greek word "deilia" (Strong's 1167), which can also be translated "cowardice." It's a spiritual condition, according to Paul, which needs to be supplanted via the usage of the God-given gift by power, love, and self discipline. Clearly, here the fire of God is beneficial and desirable.

This fire yields power, of love and of self-discipline. Odd that the author would omit this verse.

***

One last thought in conclusion. The author gives us egregiously offensive counsel: Don’t ask for more 'holy fire' in your life; you might get cancer when God answers your prayers. This astonishing statement, offered almost in a joking manner, ought to offend any thinking Christian. 

The author appears to be suggesting that asking God for the wrong thing could lead Him to give you a disease.

Does anyone really believe that God would inflict a disease on someone who has called on His name, believed on His Son, and desires to serve Him with more adequately? Is this the capricious god we serve, one who would pour out curses and pain on those who love him?

This is reminiscent of Linus, Charlie Brown's little friend, who was terrified the Great Pumpkin would notice his slip of the tongue and pass him by. But our God is not like this. He does not punish His redeemed with disease and infirmity simply because we asked for the wrong thing. He does not torture us.

This single statement by the author, aside from his manifestly faulty exegesis regarding fire, is more than enough evidence that we need to completely reject him as a teacher of the Word.