Coin of Philip.
Phil'ip the Aposi ii i >lt\i--uc 6 airoaroKoi I, one of the twelve originally appointed by Jesus. St e Apos- tle.
1. Authentic History. The Gospels contain compara- tively scanty notices of this disciple. A.Ik 25-28. He
is mentioned a- being of Bethsaida, the city of Andrew and Peter (John i. 44), and apparently was among the Galilaean peasants of that district who flocked to hear the preaching of the Baptist. The manner in which John speaks of him. the repetition by him of the self- same words with which Andrew had brought to Peter i he good news thai the Christ had at last appeared, all indicate a previous friendship with the sons of Jonah and ofZebedee, and a consequent participation in their Messianic hopes. The .lost' union of the two in John vi and xii suggests thai he may have owed to Andrew the first tidings that the hope had keen fulfilled. The statement thai Jesusjrbwnd him (John i. 13) implies a previous seeking. To him first in the whole circle of the disciples were spoken the words so full of meaning, -follow me" (ibid.). Philip was thus the fourth of the apostles who attached themselves to the person of Je- sus o| those who "left all and followed him." \- - on as he has 1. allied to know hi- Master, he is eager to communicate his discovery to another who had also shared the same expectations. He speaks to N'alhan- ael. probably on his arrival in (ana (see John xxi. '.';
comp. Ewald, Gesch. v. 251), as if tiny had not sel- dom communed together of the intimations of a better time, of a divine kingdom, which they found in their
sacred I ks. We may well believe thai he. like his
friend, was an "Israelite indeed in whom there was no guile." In the lists of the twelve apostles in the sy-
PHILIP THE APOSTLE E
noptic Gospels, his name is as uniformly at the head of the second group of four as the name of Peter is at that of the first (Matt, x, 3 ; Mark iii, 18 ; Luke vi, 14); and the facts recorded by John give the reason of this pri- oritv. In those lists again we find hi.s name uniformly coupled with that of Bartholomew, and this has led to the hypothesis that the latter is identical with the Na- thanael of John i, 45, the one heing the personal name, the other, like Barjonah or Bartima?us, a patronymic. Donaldson (Jashar, p. 9) looks on the two as brothers, but the precise mention of tov idiov dctXcpor in v, 41, and its omission here, is, as Alford remarks (on Matt, x, 3), against this hypothesis.
Philip apparently was among the first company of disciples who were with the Lord at the commencement of his ministry, at the marriage of Cana, on his first appearance as a prophet in Jerusalem (John ii ). When John was cast into prison, and the work of declaring the glad tidings of the kingdom required a new com- pany of preachers, we may believe that he, like his companions and friends, received a new call to a more constant diseipleship (Matt, iv, 18-22). When the Twelve were specially set apart to their office, he was numbered among them. The first three Gospels tell us nothing more of him individually. John, with his characteristic fulness of personal reminiscences, records a few significant utterances. The earnest, simple-hearted faith which showed itself in his first conversion, required, it would seem, an education; one stage of this may be traced, according to Clement of Alexandria (Strom, iii, 25), in the history of Matt, viii, 21. That Church fa- ther assumes that Philip was the disciple who urged the plea, " Suffer me first to go and bury my father," and who was reminded of a higher duty by the com- mand, " Let the dead bury their dead; follow thou me." When the Galilsean crowds had halted on their way to Jerusalem to hear the preaching of Jesus (John vi, 5-9), and were faint with hunger, it. was to Philip that the question was put, " Whence shall we buy bread that these may eat?" "And this he said," John adds, "to prove him, for he himself knew what he would do." The answer, "Two hundred pennyworth of bread is not sufficient for them that, every one may take a little," shows how little he was prepared for the work of divine power that followed. If, is noticeable that here, as in John i, he appears in close connection with Andrew. Bengel and others suppose that this was because the charge of providing food had been committed to Philip, while Chrysostom and Theodore of Mopsuestia rather suppose it was because this apostle was weak in faith.
Another incident is brought before us in John xii, 20-22. Among the pilgrims who had come to keep the Passover at Jerusalem were some Gentile proselytes (Hellenes) who had heard of Jesus, and desired to see him. The Greek name of Philip may have attracted them. The zealous love which he had shown in the Gase of Xathanael may have made him prompt to offer himself as their guide. But it is characteristic of him that he does not take them at once to the presence of his Master. "Philip cometh and telleth Andrew, and again Andrew and Philip tell Jesus." The friend and fellow-townsman to whom probably he owed his own introduction to Jesus of Nazareth is to introduce these strangers also.