mountainman

Greetings to the interested reader(s)!

My purpose here will be to argue the case that the text
that forms the short narrative of the non-canonical
"The Acts of Philip" -- from the Syriac -- is a parody.

Humor at its best in the fourth century.

I will defend my argument against claims that a
different translation from the Syriac may prevent
the parody from being consistent.

I will commence with the shorter narrative form
preserved in the Syriac, and will start with the
very first and opening paragraph of the text.

Here is one source:
THE GNOSTIC SOCIETY LIBRARY
ACTS OF PHILIP
From "The Apocryphal New Testament"
M.R. James-Translation and Notes
Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1924



Downtown Jerusalem.
Philip is in the bat cave awaiting action.
Suddenly the message comes through.

We are given the impression that
Philip is routinely given commands
in visions. Where now?
What's the mission this time?


Philip is a bot.




The Romans totally destroyed Carthage 146 BCE.
It appears to be up the other end of the empire
from Azotas, associated with an ancient Philistine
city either Gaza or Ashod.

The directions are conflicting.
And what is the mission this time


Typical.

But with a slight twist. The mission is
not to drive out Satan, but to drive out
the ruler of Satan.

The Christian Mob are moving into town.
They want the business.

Time to get rid of the competition.

But what is Philip's response?

Does he present as an intelligent person?
Does he have drive, ambition, enthusiam?
What will he say to Jesus?
What are his first words?




Philip could not speak Greek!
Philip could not speak Latin!

Philip was totally illiterate !!

The disciples spoke in toungues.




Jesus said "You imbecile!"

Move out!




More later ....

mountainman

Continuing the shorter narrative ...


How annoying was Philip?




Did Philip have baggage?
Why did Philip look like a servant of God?

When Philip says "I have none"
does he mean servants?

Why does Philip ask the captain to order
the passengers to come on board?

Do you think he will order them
off the boat as well?



Why is Philip's prayer "a command"?

Why did he turn to the west for a wind to
take him to Carthage, a thousand miles to
the west, when such wind must come
from the east?

Why did he command an angel of peace
for a wind, since winds do not arise
from peace?

Why an angel who has charm of fair winds,
when the wind required to get in one day
a distance of a thousand miles requires
a veritable hurricane.<p>

Notably, nothing happens immediately.
Nothing stirs.

Except ...




The sotto voiced blasphemy of Ananias
immediately filled the sails.


The wind was rushing east to west at
perhaps hundreds of miles per hour -
pointing directly at Carthage.

The winds blew on account of the
blasphemy of Ananius, not on account
of the command of the prayer of Phil.



The Jew was motivated by a desire to
assist the good of the ship's company
and to help hoist the sail with the
arrival of the wind.



A presumably christian angel
(summoned by Philip) binds him
by his toes to the top of the sail.

The Christian angel does not like
the occurrence of blasphemy.
Speaking against christianity
is/was a punishable offence.


The christian angels were enforcers
of the punishment of the crime
of blasphemy. The Jews suffered
for their obstinate denial of
the historicity of christ.



The Acts of Philip are a joke.
The joke is on Philip, and the
Christian ministry.


Philip has a mission for confessions.
Even from Jews bound by angels and
hanging by their toes from the top
of the sails.




More later ....

Toto

Hey mountainmain - have you read any of the apocrypha? There's a reason that they didn't make it into the canon. They are full of fancy and idiocy and entertaining events that obviously didn't happen except in someone's fertile imagination. Jesus makes little clay birds and they fly away! Jesus strikes his playmate dead and then revives him!

It's not exactly a parody. It's more like a Warner Brothers cartoon where the good guy can clobber the bad guys to general glee from the audience.

But I don't see the joke as being on the Christians. This is Christian revenge fantasy about beating up on the Jews.

dog-on

Yea MM, crazy stuff like people being raised form the dead, casting out demons and walking on water...

Just that wacky Roman Screen Writer's Guild doing it's thing.

mountainman

Constantine and Eusebius bound the canon
into the Constantine Bible 331 CE. IMO the
Acts of Philip (Syriac) is a parody of the NT
part of the Constantine Bible.

It may have been written anytime 325-348 CE.

It was not designed as "canonical".
It was designed as a satire and parody.



At the moment I am confining my analysis to
the Syriac preserved "Acts of Philip".

My contention is that this text, and others, quite
likely including all the apochrypha, were written
after Nicaea (ie: 325 CE) in opposition to the
centralised control of the greek and latin literature
by the christian church in the fourth century.

The Pachomian monastery is an example.

My contention is that "Acts of Philip" is a parody
against the implementation of christianity as the
state religion under Constantine.

Perhaps it was meant to be sung?
And with refrains.

In fact, we could be looking at one of the long
lost songs of Arius. He did not have a sword
that would stand up to the christian Constantine,
but he used his pen to parody the ineptitude of
the TAX-EXEMPT christian ministry with respect
to the people.

Arius of Alexander and Pachomius
would have known each other.

There were no "Christian" Gnostics before Nicaea.
When the traditional hermitages and monasteries
attempted to "go underground" they were controlled
though "ecclesiastical synods" -- and by fire later
in the fourth century.

The true "gnostics" were the fourth century
authors of texts like TAOPATTA

All this is consistent with Constantine
publishing a barrow-load of bullshit 331 CE.

Best wishes



Pete Brown

mountainman

It could have been Arius of Alexander.
Running literary satire of Constantine.
Mohammad executed two satirists.
Constantine finally had Arius poisoned.

Christianity was supposed to be taken seriously!.
The Christian God MUST NOT BE LAUGHED AT!

The christian God did not have a sense of humor.

The non tax-exempt populace would have enjoyed
songs which took the mickey out of the increasingly
serious ministry of Constantine's Universal Church.

My thesis is that many of these writings are parodies
written by Hellenic / Pythagorean / Asclepian priests
whom had been dispossessed of their temples (and
in a number of cases their lives) by Constantine c.324 CE.

Nicaea was an explosion of intolerance, with a fabrication
of ancient literature hung on a sword, to be accepted
by the Nicaean attendees --- and their descendants --
because Constantine decided to get rid of the old
ways and old traditions -- starting with Ascepius:
the ancient healer tradition, involving ascetics.

Enter Pachomius and his monastery, and the group
who prepared the 13 books known as the
Nag Hammadi Library, carbon dated to 348 CE.


The Pre-Nicene Epoch was "Christian Free".
IMO Literally.


Best wishes,



Pete Brown

dog-on

MM, Christian God is all-loving and merciful, just have faith...you must be talking about mean old Jewish God....

mountainman

The christian god has been fabricated out of a jealous god
and as a result has no sense of humour. The book of the
Jewish God was sitting in Rome (in Greek - LXX) when
Constantine liberated the city from the Roman state.

The Christian god is a fabrication of literature: a fiction
of men composed by wickedness between the years
312 and 324 CE, and then thrust upon the empire by
the first totally intolerant Pontifex Maximus BULLNECK,
as a top-down tax-exempt emperor cult.

There was a rush to fill the church structure: it had
presence at the imperial court, power, prestige, and
very little intelligence.

Hence the fourth century parodies.

Best wishes,



Pete Brown

mountainman

Continuing with this text ....



Notably, the history of Ananias stops
well short of the history of the purported
life of Jesus Christ, about whom Philip
seeks confession.

But we know Philip is illiterate.
Will Philip notice that the history
given does not include Jesus Christ?

Will he display such utter stupidity?

Philip bought the speech.

Even though Anianas history fell short
of the history of the life of the master -
the purported Jesus Christ - by many
centuries, Philip asks for his pardon.

Philip has little control over the
aggressive Christian angel.

Philip is stupid.

The aggressive Christian angel
unbinds his victim.


Such great stupidity!
Such great power!



More later .....

figuer

The Romans rebuilt Carthage. During the empire it was an impotant city. Does someone so versed in Imperial history ignore such a fact? And you know this how?