06-27-2013, 05:31 PM
Scorpio (folks),
In some theological circles there is discussion as to what is meant by being "given" the Gift of the Holy Sp.'t in reference to passages like Acts 2:33, Acts 2:38 , Acts 10:45 and the term in a few places elsewhere in the epistles like Romans 1:11. Some state that the Gift of the Sp.'t is not the Holy Sp.'t Himself but what the Holy Sp.'t gives. IOW, in this view it is the Holy Sp.'t that gives something to the believer. But the majority view is that the Gift of the Holy Sp.'t is the Holy Sp.'t Himself.
what is the position from the Aramaic Peshitta point of view?
I think, taken from the Aramaic Peshitta reading (Acts 2:33, here the Promise is the Gift; see also Acts 10:45) the Gift is the Holy Sp.'t Himself and NOT something that the Holy Sp.'t gives. This is the majority view.
Also, since I / we are on this issue I would like to ask about Romans 1:11 where Paul says, according to the English translation , something like he (Paul) is eager to visit the church at Rome and impart to them the "Gift" of [the] Sp.'t.
So, does this mean that the Roman believers did not yet have the "Gift" of the Sp.'t and, would this scenerio be a head on contradiction to what Paul said about the INDWELLING (of the Sp.'t) over in Romans 8:1-14 or 1-15 ?
Also, is it not true , anyway, that believers are given the "Gift" of the Sp.'t upon placing their faith in Jesus? as at least somewhat (clearly) stated in Acts 5:32? Do not believers in the church at Rome presently have the Holy Sp.'t at the time Paul was writing the letter. What goes on here?
In Romans 1:11 is not Paul talking about the Holy Sp.'t Himself? The King James Version (English) reads as - "some SPIRITUAL GIFT" so at first there is no problem with this wording. Pleas share your thoughts and reflections.
Kindly,
Mike Karoules
In some theological circles there is discussion as to what is meant by being "given" the Gift of the Holy Sp.'t in reference to passages like Acts 2:33, Acts 2:38 , Acts 10:45 and the term in a few places elsewhere in the epistles like Romans 1:11. Some state that the Gift of the Sp.'t is not the Holy Sp.'t Himself but what the Holy Sp.'t gives. IOW, in this view it is the Holy Sp.'t that gives something to the believer. But the majority view is that the Gift of the Holy Sp.'t is the Holy Sp.'t Himself.
what is the position from the Aramaic Peshitta point of view?
I think, taken from the Aramaic Peshitta reading (Acts 2:33, here the Promise is the Gift; see also Acts 10:45) the Gift is the Holy Sp.'t Himself and NOT something that the Holy Sp.'t gives. This is the majority view.
Also, since I / we are on this issue I would like to ask about Romans 1:11 where Paul says, according to the English translation , something like he (Paul) is eager to visit the church at Rome and impart to them the "Gift" of [the] Sp.'t.
So, does this mean that the Roman believers did not yet have the "Gift" of the Sp.'t and, would this scenerio be a head on contradiction to what Paul said about the INDWELLING (of the Sp.'t) over in Romans 8:1-14 or 1-15 ?
Also, is it not true , anyway, that believers are given the "Gift" of the Sp.'t upon placing their faith in Jesus? as at least somewhat (clearly) stated in Acts 5:32? Do not believers in the church at Rome presently have the Holy Sp.'t at the time Paul was writing the letter. What goes on here?
In Romans 1:11 is not Paul talking about the Holy Sp.'t Himself? The King James Version (English) reads as - "some SPIRITUAL GIFT" so at first there is no problem with this wording. Pleas share your thoughts and reflections.
Kindly,
Mike Karoules