Regarding Philip’s labours prior to his settle- ment in Hierapolis, the traditions are divergent. The Journeyings represent him as travelling through Lydia and Asia; in the apocryphal Acts of Philip, Upper Hellas, particularly Athens (where he is said to have abode for two years, and to have founded a Church, appointing presbyters and dea- cons), and afterwards Parthia, are the scenes of his ministry ; while later Latin documents attribute to him the evangelization of the Gauls (Galatians?) and Scythians (Lipsius, iii. 26, 50, E. 19; Fabricius, Cod. Apoc. ii. 736). Similarly conflicting are the traditions regarding the manner of Philip's death. A natural decease appears to be indicated by Clement of Alex. (Strom. iv. 9), pseudo-Doroth., pseudo-Epiphan., and the Latin Passio Philipps (according to the last-mentioned, at the age of
* Eus. (ΠῈ iil. 89) refers to a still earlier testimony in the game direction by Papias, bishop of Hierapolis ge half of 2nd cent.), to the effect that the daughters of Philip the apostle had told him (Papias) about a man raised from the dead in their father’s time. As Eus., however, does not quote the exact words of Papias, and as the historian himsel con- fused the two Philips, this reference must be regarded as uncertain. .
+ In a recently discovered ancient Christian inscription δὲ Hierapolis reference is made toa Church τοῦ ἐνδέξευ ἃ πυστέλεν καὶ θιολόγου Φιλίσαον (Ramsay, Cities and Bishoprica of Phrygia, p. 652). Although Philip the Evangelist is sometimes called awse- redor in the wide sense (see above), so forma! an ascription of apostleship is not likely to have been made except to one of
ὁ Twelve.
t The earliest and strongest testimony in favour of the Philip who settled in Hierapolis being the evangelist, is the statement in Eusebius (Η Εὶ ἘΠ. 31), that ina dialogue held at Rome early in the 8rd cent. between Caius and Proclus a Montanist, the latter is represented as referring to ‘four | ghee daughters of Philip, whose tomb, as well as that of their father, was at Hier
apolis.’ It is, of course, not absolutely impossible that both Philips were buried with their respective daughters in the same city ; but, assuming the improbat ility of such a coincidence, it is ἃ tenable supposition that either Bus. (through his o
being secisndtin Ὁ misunderstood, so far, Proclus, or that Proclus himself, knowing about ‘daughters of Philip’ buried at Hier- apolis, assumed mistakenly that these belonged to Philip the Evangelist. The tradition, moreover, which } Jentifies the Philip of Hierapolis with the evange list is neutralized by the counter. tradition, according to which the latter became bishop of Tralles
(see next article).
836 PHILIP
87). Other ancient authorities ascribe martyrdom to the apostle. Pseudo-Hippol., the Journeyings, and the ie
thiopian Acts represent him as crucified head anita (according to the first document, under Domitian; according to the second, in the reign of Trajan) ; while several Latin martyrologies and an ancient Irish Passio relate that he was tirst stoned, then crucified (Lipsius, iii. 25, 26, 48, 50, E. 73; Atkinson, Passions and Homilies from Leabhar Breac, pp. 112, 358).
Lrrerature (in addition to works referred to).—Acta Sanc- torum, vol. xiv. p. 7 ff.; Lightfoot, Colossians, p. 451.; Expositor, Jan. 1875, Dec. 1877; A. Maclaren, A Year's Ministry, 2nd series; A. B. Bruce, Training of the Twelve.
2, PHILIP THE EVANGELIST.—One of the Seven chosen by the primitive Church at Jerusalem, and ordained by the apostles (Ac 6) to take charge of the daily ministration of charity to the Christian widows and other poor (see DEACON). If not a Hellenist Jew, he was a Hebrew with conspicuously liberal sympathies. After the outbreak of perse- cution, inaugurated with the martyrdom of his colleague Stephen, Philip, hindered in the fulfil- ment of one oflice, straightway entered on the work of another. He was one of those who de- parted from Jerusalem for missionary ministry (8*°). As Stephen was the forerunner of Paul in unfolding the relation of Christianity to Judaism and in repudiating the Jewish claim to a monopoly of Divine favour, so Philip was the precursor of the Apostle of the Gentiles in ee, zeal, and
rticularly in opening the door of the Church’s ellowship to non-Jewish believers. (1) He selected as his first missionary field the (chief) city of Samaria (Ac 8° RV), i.e. either Sebaste (Samaria) or Neapolis (Sychem). The Samaritans, notwith- standing their partial Hebrew descent and partial acceptance of Judaism (including circumcision), were
rigidly excluded from the Jewish Church, and were denied even the privilege, accorded to heathens, of becoming proselytes. To this people Philip, mind-
ful doubtless of our Lord’s own Samaritan minis- try (Jn 4), proclaimed the Gospel and administered baptism. The inhabitants of the city had long been under the influence of Smmon MAGus (which see),whom his sorceries had induced them to regard as ‘the Power of God which is called Great’ (Ac 81), Philip’s preaching, supported by miracles of healing and of dispossession, was successful in transferring Samaritan allegiance from Simon to Christ. The population as a whole were baptized ; and Simon himself (although with divided heart, as the issue proved) believed and received baptism. Philip’s success in Samaria led to the despatch thither of Peter and John, who completed the work which the evangelist had begun. The first stage was thus reached in the development of the Chris- tian Brotherhood out of a Jewish sect into the Catholic Church. (2) A further service in the same direction was rendered by Philip through his bap- tism of the Ethiopian eunuch, whom he met, by Divine aug estion and providential arrangement, on ther tween Jerusalem and Gaza(Ac 8388.) 5 This eunuch, who held the high office of treasurer to CANDACE (which see), queen of the Ethiopians, had apparently me, in his native land, a ‘proselyte of the gate’+ to Judaism, and was