Fire of God

[Esther]

What would you say is the "Fire of God"?

Originally Posted by Esther

What would you say is the "Fire of God"?

God is fire. He is a consuming fire.

[Esther]

Originally Posted by Brother Strange

God is fire. He is a consuming fire.

And would you say the Holy Ghost is that fire in us?

[stmatthew]

Mat 3:11 I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and [with] fire:


This verse seems to separate the 2 into 2 separate things.

[Esther]

Originally Posted by stmatthew

Mat 3:11 I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and [with] fire:


This verse seems to separate the 2 into 2 separate things.

Yes that verse is the reason for the question.

You are too smart.

So what is your take?

You will be tried as by fire...the fire of God to purge out the dross as gold is purified.

He will baptize you with the Holy Ghost and purgings (fire) that you may be holy even as he is holy. But, the baptism of the Holy Ghost will give you the strength to stand the trials that are sure to come to try you, even as by fire.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by stmatthew

Mat 3:11 I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and [with] fire:


This verse seems to separate the 2 into 2 separate things.

I don't see how, "and" does not necessarily mean two separate things anymore than when the bible says "God and our Father" means two separate things plus the conjunction is Kai which can also be translated "even"

[Esther]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

I don't see how, "and" does not necessarily mean two separate things anymore than when the bible says "God and our Father" means two separate things plus the conjunction is Kai which can also be translated "even"

So do you believe it means the same thing or two different elements?

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Esther

So do you believe it means the same thing or two different elements?

I would never refer to the Spirit of God as an element and I think the word fire is symbolic

The thing is John did not say "He will baptize some with Holy Spirit and others with Fire"

Rather "He shall baptize YOU with Holy Spirit and Fire"...

I think possibly the fire reference here is to Holiness by purging

The NET bible commentary notes

16 sn With the Holy Spirit and fire. There are differing interpretations for this phrase regarding the number of baptisms and their nature. (1) Some see one baptism here, and this can be divided further into two options. (a) The baptism of the Holy Spirit and fire could refer to the cleansing, purifying work of the Spirit in the individual believer through salvation and sanctification, or (b) it could refer to two different results of Christ's ministry: Some accept Christ and are baptized with the Holy Spirit, but some reject him and receive judgment. (2) Other interpreters see two baptisms here: The baptism of the Holy Spirit refers to the salvation Jesus brings at his first advent, in which believers receive the Holy Spirit, and the baptism of fire refers to the judgment Jesus will bring upon the world at his second coming. One must take into account both the image of fire and whether individual or corporate baptism is in view. A decision is not easy on either issue. The image of fire is used to refer to both eternal judgment (e.g., Mat_25:41) and the power of the Lord's presence to purge and cleanse his people (e.g., Isa_4:4-5). The pouring out of the Spirit at Pentecost, a fulfillment of this prophecy no matter which interpretation is taken, had both individual and corporate dimensions. It is possible that since Holy Spirit and fire are governed by a single preposition in Greek, the one-baptism view may be more likely, but this is not certain. Simply put, there is no consensus view in scholarship at this time on the best interpretation of this passage.