Talk:Philip the Apostle

Gospel of Philip

"Gnostic Christians appealed to the apostolic authority of Philip, ascribing a number of Gnostic texts to him, most notably the Gospel of Philip from the Nag Hammadi library."

The actual article on Gospel of Philip at Wikipedia disputes the fact that it was written by Philip, or ascribed to him. (although it doesn't mention not being ascribed to him, it states as fact that it was not) --70.142.33.189 (talk) 09:25, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Reference #12 "^ Tomb of St. Philip the Apostle Discovered in Turkey. FoxNews.com. Retrieved on 27 May 2011," is falsified. The article claims, "The structure of the tomb and the writings on the wall proved it belonged to St. Philip, he added." referring to Italian professor Francesco D'Andria. At the time of the discovery he made no such claim, but it was being reported. Later his claims made in an interview with ZENIT, it's clear there is no Scientific Method to validate his claim. His indoctrination to the bible evident. There is no proof it's Philip its a hypothesis at best, that lacks evidence.

"However, the main -- I would say mathematical -- confirmation which attests, without a shadow of a doubt, that that construction is really St. Philip’s tomb comes from a small object that is in the Museum of Richmond in the United States." How I Discovered the Tomb of the Apostle Philip Interview With Archaeologist Francesco D'Andria - May 2, 2012

John Panzer in Berkeley (talk) 19:05, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Roman Catholic saint

There's an implication of ownership in the category. The possessive case is used. Philip no more belonged to the RC church than he did to the EO church. No such names existed at the time. At least the Lutheran category name is more honest as it says that they are listed in the litany of saints honoured by Lutherans. It's possible that the RC and EO categories need to be renamed in like manner. As they currently stand, their name leaves them open to ownership charges and so the categories should be excluded. Laurel Lodged (talk) 21:02, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

No they should not - it is just disruptive to remove a few individuals from huge categories because you dislike the name of the category. Surely you can see that? You are just causing work for editors reverting you. Use WP:CFD if you want to change the name, but I would check the previous history of the categories there carefully before you do. Johnbod (talk) 00:05, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

FYI, the discussion has been centralised at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Saints per StAnselm's suggestion. BTW, the edits were undertaken boldly and in good faith because it was the right thing to do and not on a personal whim. If you think that Philip belongs exclusively to the RC denomination or to the whatever-you're-having-yourself denomination, as opposed to "The Church" in general, feel free to make those points at the centralised discussion. Laurel Lodged (talk)

Mission to Britain

Obviously legendary but, by the 12th century at least, you've got William of Malmesbury describing Philip's mission to Gaul as an undisputed fact and proposing that he may have extended his mission to Britain (On the Antiquity of the Glastonbury Church & Deeds). This was later emended to him sending on Joseph of Arimathea instead of going on himself. You don't want WP:UNDUE emphasis on the points (they're almost certainly untrue after all), but they're worth noting. — LlywelynII 05:04, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Philip the Apostle. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070226234127/http://www.catholic-forum.com/saints/saintp21.htm to http://www.catholic-forum.com/Saints/saintp21.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:06, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Philip the Evangelist

The distinction made in our pages between the two Philips is not universally accepted. See Christopher R. Matthews, Philip: Apostle and Evangelist (Brill, 2002). Note, for example, that the author of Acts provides no more than a name (Philip) to identify the man who evangelized the Ethiopian. Srnec (talk) 17:46, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

---

The article states that Eusebius "clearly assumes that both Philips are the same person.[6]" True that the reference points to an obvious mistake in Book III, but Eusebius clearly knew there were two Philips, Philip the Apostle and Philip the Evangelist. In Church History, Book 2, section 1, he writes "Philip, however, one of those who had been ordained with Stephen to the diaconate...." In Book III, he mistakenly states that it was the Apostle Paul who had daughters; it doesn't seem he thought the two Philips were one and the same person.Subitopiano (talk) 02:43, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

References

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• Ethiopian-Eritrean cross 1.png

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 12:09, 7 March 2022 (UTC)