I was always warned off Platonism as that anti-Christian philosophy that infiltrated and corrupted Christian theology. As I studied theology that seemed to be the universal message that I was hearing.
But the more I read the Fathers the more I became suspicious of this suspicion of Christian Platonism. It seemed to me that Christian Platonism in one version or another was the predominant theology of the orthodox churches, both East and West, for well over a thousand years. I did not have it in me to simply reject such a tradition as “corrupt” Christianity. These were the guys who defined orthodoxy.
So we are due for a revival of Christian Platonism; not the body-hating caricature of Christian Platonism but a body-affirming version.
Here are some good thoughts from Simon Oliver of Nottingham University in a video interview on Plato.
Or else we are due for a redefinition of orthodoxy.
The problem with Christian Platonism or any substantialist ontology as it relates to Christianity is not the lack of emphasis on the body – although that is a problem – it is that Christian Platonism can never lead us to the God of the scriptures. The Christian doctrine of God cannot be predicated on a form of metaphysics, rather, it must formed based on God Himself – that is, the life and teachings of Jesus. A revival of Christian Platonism would be a move away from seeking God by way of God’s self, and a move toward seeking God by way of abstract metaphysical speculation.
I suppose that the best response to that is simply to read the church fathers. They were very concerned with the God revealed in Christ and testified to in Scripture—it is the heart of their faith. Platonism was not plundered by the Fathers in order to lead to this God but in order to find an intellectual framework for articulating and defending this biblical vision. The Bible may not articulate its metaphysics and ontology but its vision of God raises ontological and metaphysical questions. One can ignore those questions but in certain contexts that would be to invite others to fill the void by suggesting answers that undermine the biblical vision. So the fathers addressed the philosophical questions raised by their context. They did not seek to replace divine self-revelation in Christ by pagan philosophy. Rather, they drew on resources from pagan philosophy in order to articulate the God of the Bible. For them it was not a choice between Jesus or Platonism nor was it ever about salvation through philosophy. Christian Platonism has to be trinitarian and Christ-focused or it is not CHRISTIAN Platonism.