Well I mean, Sun is a big burning ball of gas, but fire is the incorrect term because the burning I'm referring to is nucleosynthesis. I think there are a couple misconceptions that don't really annoy me because they're justifiable, it just annoys me when people draw incorrect conclusions through said misconceptions. Namely, those who think the Big Bang was an explosion that created the universe, which violates the laws of conservation. It wasn't an explosion, it didn't create the universe, and the theory doesn't break any laws of physics. The Big Bang is the outward expansion of spacetime from a point by which we cannot possibly measure before. Due to conservation laws the Big Bang could not have created any energy, so the energy had to have been present at the time that observable time begins. Since observable time begins with the Big Bang, there is no such thing as "before" the Big Bang, therefor the energy was always existent, which means the universe was always existent. I know this steps on toes of creationists, which I don't want to do, I don't care what anyone believes in, but the Big Bang is not proof for creationism and to argue it as proof is incorrect.

Calling the sun or any star a big ball of fire really does a disservice to the awesomeness of stars.

Supper massive uncontained nuclear fusion reactors. Yeah!