In Plato’s works, The Republic and Timaeus, the philosopher presents two ideas – the allegory of the cave and the analogy of the divided line. In the analogy, Plato describes a line that is unequally separated into four parts. Each of these segments represents two parts of the visible and the intelligible world, and a person’s psyche resides on one of these parts and moves through them. Here, the concept of learning is challenged as Plato denies that all knowledge can be united under one level of truth. For example, imagination based on guessing and observation is assumed to be far from reality.
The cave allegory explores similar principles, where understanding is removed from illusion as two opposites of seeing the world. In this case, Plato considers the difference between the nature of knowledge and its connection to reality (epistemology) and simple perception of reality (ontology). The philosopher denies that knowledge has meaning by itself – in contrast, it is only meaningful when one sees the connections between ideas, facts, and reality.
Similar to Plato, Philo’s views are based on the denial of knowledge as described by the Stoics. Here, epistemology challenges the idea that absolute knowledge can be achieved. Instead, Philo accepts a form of knowledge that is hypothetical, based on change and the influence of other forces. Therefore, the philosopher’s approach is close to Plato, who insists that knowledge is not a collection of facts or a simple observation, but a strive towards understanding through thought, debate, and logic. Nevertheless, Philo’s beliefs are much more based on religion and on God’s role in humans’ existence. His distinction between the ontological and the epistemological relies on showing that God is the ultimate source of reason and thinking.
Plato’s and Philo’s thoughts shape the idea of being as transcendent and not bound by relationality and perception. This way of thinking aligns with many religions’ beliefs rooted in faith and separation from the corporeal world. Thus, it is clear that there exist connections between Platonian philosophy and religious formation. One can also see how these ideas can influence the relationship between God and knowledge expressed in Christian thought. Plato laid a foundation for the idea that people do not perceive the world directly but through concepts and ideas. The allegory of the cave described above explains this phenomenon and likely informs many seminarians’ beliefs. God’s understanding does not need to be based on the rational perception of reality, but an abstract plane of knowledge exists.
Justin Martyr’s perception of God and Christianity also shows signs of Platonism. As a Christian apologist who learned about Plato’s philosophy, Martyr sees Christian imagery in Plato’s Timaeus, combining the philosopher’s work with God’s image. Here, the comparison of God to the Demiurge differs from the thoughts on religion expressed by other doctrines that were widespread at the time. Martyr perceived God as ineffable, while Jesus acts as a mediator between the material world and God.
Athenagoras’ writing challenges some of the Stoics’ thinking, as the latter is rooted in intellectual and not spiritual understanding. He ascribes to Stoics the belief that God is one, although He is divided into different names based on natural, perceived parts of various matter. Athenagoras disagrees with this view, stating that it is impossible, returning to concepts resembling Plato’s thinking. In his eyes, God is one not in a way that every matter corresponds to God of a certain name, but that one God created all, and the Spirit of God is a guiding force that is connected to humanity. Overall, one can see how Platonism has been accepted as a way of interpreting Christianity and religious thinking by many philosophers.
Bibliography
Edwards, Mark, ed. The Routledge Handbook of Early Christian Philosophy. New York, NY: Routledge, 2020.
Matoso, Renato. “Cognition, Objects, and Proportions in the Divided Line.” Plato Journal 22 (2021): 19-26.
Yli-Karjanmaa, Sami. Immortality in Philo of Alexandria. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2021.