Plato and Aristotle in Brian McLaren's KNOC Trilogy - Part II

Plato, in his Phaedo, has Socrates explain his doctrine of Ideas, or, Forms. We live in a world of particulars - particular dogs and cats, particular people with particular desires. There exists, according to Plato's Socrates, an essence to each of these - dogs, cats, man, etc - that is its Form, its natural essence. The particulars that we see around us are imperfect versions of the perfect Forms.

This doctrine is extremely important to understanding the history of theological thought. Philosophy began in a world that believed in multiple gods which govern the world. If there were multiple gods, gods who battled each other, there were multiple truths about the world. What marked the beginnings of philosophy was the attempt to know not truths, but Truth; or, the attempt to know the essence or nature of reality. Plato's doctrine of the Ideas is an attempt to know the essence of reality.

Now, consider the implications for Christianity of this doctrine of Ideas. If there is one truth, then there is one God. Vice versa, if there is one God, then there is one truth. This is why Plato is often blamed by critics of belief in God for having created God. Plato invented God, it is said, via his doctrine of Ideas.

Given the predominance of this neoplatonic worldview in early Christian times (Rome conquered Greece militarily but Greece conquered Rome culturally), and given the clear similarity between neoplatonic Ideas and any universal, monotheistic religion (e.g. Christianity), the need to establish some sort of relationship between early Christianity and neoplatonism was inevitable. According the McLaren's Neo, the result of the relationship chosen by the Fathers of the early church was that of a neoplatonic Christianity that cast the Biblical story in terms of a perfect form of man that existed in the Garden, only to be tainted by sin such that we have fallen from perfection and are sinful shadows of the Adam-like men and Eve-like women God wants us to be.

Neo then goes on to offer a different telling of the Biblical story, one animated by the thought of Aristotle as opposed to Plato. Aristotle was concerned about the resistance of Plato's doctrine of Ideas to change, which Aristotle, much more interested in natural history than was Plato, saw around him all the time. Aristotle offered a contrasting view of the nature, or essence, or reality. Every substance bears within it potentiality, according to Aristotle. This potentiality may or may not become an actuality. But it is the potentiality within things, not the static, perfect Forms of things, that determine the behavior of things.

This distinction between Aristotle and Plato is also referred to as the distinction between dynamic Becoming and static Being. Christians have typically conceived of the world as a fallen version of a static perfection (Being); as a result, Christian living should be a rediscovery of what the sinless life, a la the Garden, looks like and to live that sinless life that God made us for, and then to exhort others to live that life as well. However, McLaren's Neo believes in no idealized version of sinless man that we should aspire to. The Garden of Eden was, according to Neo, "good, not perfect". Rather, the Christian life is characterized by participating with God in the ongoing emergence of His world, His Kingdom, which is a present and developing reality. As Dallas Willard once said, "There is a whole lot more the being a Christian than not sinning."

If you have endured this far in this two-part blog, kudos to you. The distinction between Plato and Aristotle, between Being and Becoming, is one of the fundamental issues in theological thought. Some theologians, those who have read classical thought beginning with Plato and Aristotle, are aware of this such that this theme is a constant undercurrent and concern in their writings, their sermons, and their ministries; others are unequipped with these fundamental currents of theological thought and often find themselves unwittingly on both sides of the fence on this issue, or worse, on one side of the fence (e.g. neoplatonic Being) and persecuting those on the other side for their "doubting of truth" without really understanding the real disagreements between them.

Comments

[djchuang]

ahh.. and I don't recall when I'd heard Aristole nor Plato mentioned at any pulpit, as the origin of thought for how we think about life and God.. fascinating theological trace :)

[Richard Leslie]

Response to djchuang
Please take a look at the Italian Renaissance integration within Catholicism of Plato & Aristotle. There is a history of ideas that is linked, whether one quotes it directly or not. Many of our beliefs & disbeliefs stem from such chains of thought.
rl

[suprayouth]

Even if you are the only one who wants to save your troubled marriage you can do it alone once you know what you need to do. So, relax, take a deep breath and let's get started with some things you can do to get started on saving a troubled marriage.

[mulberry bags]

I like ANMJ on FB & just subscribed to the email feed! :)