This verse is evidence that no apostle had been to Rome prior to 57 AD, otherwise they would have a spiritual gift.
I don't think Paul quite means it in the terms of laying on of hands and something happening. If that was the case churches would be in big trouble since there are no apostles around. Paul clarifies himself in verse 12 by saying:
Rom 1:11-12 For I long to see you, that I may impart unto you some spiritual gift, to the end ye may be established; That is, that I may be comforted together with you by the mutual faith both of you and me.
Paul is referring to spiritual gifts in a "comfort" sense and he would receive just as much give.
There were clearly believers already there, the Gospel having been already brought there, perhaps by Roman soldiers, but no apostle has been there yet...And Paul says: "I" not "We":
If there were believers, then there were gifts of the Holy Spirit.
As far as "I" not "we"; if Peter and Paul had already been there and Paul was planning on making a return trip, why would he need to include Peter or "we"?
If he met Peter there, it would have been between Paul's two imprisonments in Rome when Peter visited there from Asia Minor
Not necessarily. I've laid out a time line that could reasonably support my hypothesis. It doesn't refute what you are saying. It only offers another explanation.
277 posted on 10/30/2006 11:31:31 AM PST by HarleyD
("Then He opened their minds to understand the Scriptures" Luk 24:45)