Plotinus, the One and Christian Philosophy

[LeonardDeNoblac]

I’ve started to do researches about Plotinus and Neoplatonic philosophy, for personal interest.
I was wondering about what Plotinus described as the One. It is in some ways similar to the Christian concept of God, but it has some fundamental differences: for example, it’s not personal nor conscious, has no intellect or will, is totally ineffable (meaning that we can’t say anything positive at all about it, not even in an analogical sense, except that it is the very idea - in a Platonic sense - of Good and that it is sheer potentiality - however, how can anything arise out of sheer potentiality? ), and creates by spontaneous emanation out of a necessity of its own nature.
But the thing that surprises me the most is that Plotinus described the One as beyond Being and Not-Being. The One, according to Plotinus, is not even a being, but goes beyond any category of Being. My question is: if the One is not a being, how can it exist? Whatever is not a being is nothing: is the One nothing, then? Or is it a union between Being and Not-Being? And if it is so, what kind of union is that, wich adds nothing to Being?
I find the Thomistic concept of God (the perfection of Being, wich has existence in itself and from wich everything else receives being - that is, created things don’t have existence in themselves, but participate in God’s Being - through a voluntary act of creation ex nihilo ) far more satisfactory and less problematic, both for philosophy (Saint Thomas Aquinas never descended into irrationalism, like I think Plotinus did ) and theology (contrary to Neoplatonism, in Thomism there’s nothing incompatible with Catholic dogma - Saint Thomas Aquinas is not remembered as the Doctor Angelicus for no reason ).
However, since some Christian philosophers did embrace Platonism, especially during the Renaissance, and tried to reconcile it with the Christian faith, is there anyone who can say if any attempt has ever been successfull?
I don’t ask this because I want to become a Platonist or because I find anything lacking in Thomism - indeed! I just want to know, out of mere curiosity.

 

[Babaganoush]

Plotinus had a big influence on many early Christians. He was instrumental in the conversion of Augustine.

There is a distinction between kataphatic and apophatic theology. Kataphatic theology approaches God through positive affirmations. Apophatic theology is negative theology. It essentially says that we can say nothing positive about God. God is beyond human comprehension and anything we say falls short, and is potentially erroneous. We run the risk of setting up idols by making positive claims about God. An example of an early Christian who emphasized this is (pseudo) Dionysius the aereopagite. Gregory of Nysa, Gregory Nazianzen, Maximus the confessor, and other eastern Christians had a big emphasis on it as well.

Apophatic theology is emphasized more in the East. When you pray you shouldn’t have an image of God in your mind, because it isn’t an accurate image. The Byzantine tradition also makes the difference between the essence and energy of God partly for this reason. Gods grace is granted to us, but his essence is beyond creation. The gap is infinite between God and his creation and it can’t be crossed.

 

[TryingtoGainFaith]

Catholic theologians were so impressive so that to know about all other forgotten philosophies one has to (re)search! I would say Holy Spirit was involved.

My current concept of God to align as much with catholic theology and modern science is the following.

God the Father: omnipotent, and omnipresent spirit.It includes evil spirits too (Materialistic indication: singularity, quantum mechanics and string theory)

Christ The Son: God’s human form so that we can converse (pray) and love.

Holy Spirit: Soul capturable essence of God (spirit).

For my comprehension I now consider spirit (of God) is in a way similar to mathematical zero. You add or subtract one or many zero (Life spirit given to Adam, evil spirits present in us (cf. Legion) with no perceptible difference.

 

[LeonardDeNoblac]

Apophatic theology is negative theology. It essentially says that we can say nothing positive about God. God is beyond human comprehension and anything we say falls short, and is potentially erroneous. We run the risk of setting up idols by making positive claims about God.

Yes, I know it. But apophatic theology doesn’t need to be as radical as Plotinus puts it. Saint Thomas Aquinas, for example, mantained that God is truly and really incomprehensible, but also that there are some things that can be predicated positively about Him, even thought in an analogical or figurative sense and not in a real sense - for example, it is true to say that God is Love, but His love is totally different from human love and no human concept can express it accurately.

The Byzantine tradition also makes the difference between the essence and energy of God partly for this reason.

This is a doctrine that I find strange and potentially heretical. How do they mantain Divine Simplicity if they say that in God there is something really distinct from His essence?