I was having a conversation with a friend of mine when he said, “We need to pray that God will baptize us in fire.” I found it very interesting, because I hold a different view of what “the baptism of fire” really is. I did some studying and found that there are three popular views regarding what the “baptism of fire” really is.
The idea of a “baptism of fire” primarily comes out of a text in the New Testament, where John the Dipper says of Jesus, “He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire.” (Luke 3.16)
The first view states that Christians will automatically be “baptized with fire” at the same time that they are baptized with the Holy Spirit. Essentially, being baptized with the Holy Spirit and with fire is essentially one act. This view states that the “tongues of fire” coming upon the Apostles at Pentecost is symbolic of the baptism of fire and the baptism of the Holy Spirit happen at the same time. They are inseparable.
The second view states that the “baptism of fire” is significantly different from the “baptism of the Holy Spirit” which all Christians experience. This “baptism of fire” is not experienced by every Christian. “What is the purpose of this baptism of fire?” Simply to “set us on fire” for God. I believe this is the view my friend holds, and his praying for a “baptism of fire” makes sense in this interpretation.
The third view (and the one I hold) is that the “baptism of fire” is a baptism that those who are not God’s people will go through. God’s people experience the baptism of the Holy Spirit, but those without God will, in the future, experience a “baptism of fire.” It is the judgment of God upon those who are not His people through Christ. It is definitely not something we want to pray for! Why do I think this is what John the Dipper is talking about? Let me give you a few reasons why I think this is the most appropriate interpretation:
First, this interpretation is supported by the context. In the context of this verse, we see one group of people who have confessed their sins and a group of people who have not (whom John calls, in a very derogative way, “Brood of vipers!”, one of the greatest insults of the day). Therefore, there were two kinds of people to whom John was speaking. This passage has tons of parallelism. We have the righteous people and the unrighteous, and we have a baptism of the Holy Spirit and a baptism of fire. This parallelism seems to support the view that the “baptism of fire” refers to God’s judgment on the unrighteous (remember, we are only righteous “in Christ”; our own righteousness is like filthy rags).
Second, we need to look at the meaning of the word “fire” in the context. John points out that every “tree” (person) which does not produce the fruit of repentance will be “thrown into the fire.” This fire of judgment is followed by a “baptism of fire,” which is followed by the “unquenchable fire of judgment.” With the expert use of parallelism in this passage, it makes sense that the meaning of “fire” in the first and third usages are no different than the second usage (“baptism of fire”). In verse 12, John specifically gave an explanation of the word “fire”: it is the fire of judgment.
The idea of a “baptism of fire” primarily comes out of a text in the New Testament, where John the Dipper says of Jesus, “He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire.” (Luke 3.16)
The first view states that Christians will automatically be “baptized with fire” at the same time that they are baptized with the Holy Spirit. Essentially, being baptized with the Holy Spirit and with fire is essentially one act. This view states that the “tongues of fire” coming upon the Apostles at Pentecost is symbolic of the baptism of fire and the baptism of the Holy Spirit happen at the same time. They are inseparable.
The second view states that the “baptism of fire” is significantly different from the “baptism of the Holy Spirit” which all Christians experience. This “baptism of fire” is not experienced by every Christian. “What is the purpose of this baptism of fire?” Simply to “set us on fire” for God. I believe this is the view my friend holds, and his praying for a “baptism of fire” makes sense in this interpretation.
The third view (and the one I hold) is that the “baptism of fire” is a baptism that those who are not God’s people will go through. God’s people experience the baptism of the Holy Spirit, but those without God will, in the future, experience a “baptism of fire.” It is the judgment of God upon those who are not His people through Christ. It is definitely not something we want to pray for! Why do I think this is what John the Dipper is talking about? Let me give you a few reasons why I think this is the most appropriate interpretation:
First, this interpretation is supported by the context. In the context of this verse, we see one group of people who have confessed their sins and a group of people who have not (whom John calls, in a very derogative way, “Brood of vipers!”, one of the greatest insults of the day). Therefore, there were two kinds of people to whom John was speaking. This passage has tons of parallelism. We have the righteous people and the unrighteous, and we have a baptism of the Holy Spirit and a baptism of fire. This parallelism seems to support the view that the “baptism of fire” refers to God’s judgment on the unrighteous (remember, we are only righteous “in Christ”; our own righteousness is like filthy rags).
Second, we need to look at the meaning of the word “fire” in the context. John points out that every “tree” (person) which does not produce the fruit of repentance will be “thrown into the fire.” This fire of judgment is followed by a “baptism of fire,” which is followed by the “unquenchable fire of judgment.” With the expert use of parallelism in this passage, it makes sense that the meaning of “fire” in the first and third usages are no different than the second usage (“baptism of fire”). In verse 12, John specifically gave an explanation of the word “fire”: it is the fire of judgment.
No comments:
Post a Comment