Platonist
Join now to read essay Platonist
Platonist
In his treatise about Christianity in the Roman Empire, this Roman philosopher will present a strong argument that Christians should listen to their emperor and not their God. He also provides evidence as to why the Christian religion is irrational in the eyes of a good Roman citizen. By being a Roman philosopher during the time of the Roman Empires prominence, his words would have great significance with the Roman citizens. The treatise issued by this Roman philosopher clearly states what he thinks about Christians, why he thinks it, and why it is significant during his time.
From this excerpt, it is apparent that the author believes Christianity to be a peculiar and irrational religion. Not only is it irrational but it is also irresponsible for Romans to put Christianity before the emperors word. The philosopher asserts that if there is a God, then He would have created the other gods below him, and “to worship the great god Helios or to speak well of Athena, we are in so doing worshiping God as well.” Paying homage to other gods amplifies, not diminishes, the worship of God. A similar concept is portrayed in The Golden Ass by Apuleius. The omnipotent god, Isis, acknowledges the other gods beneath her. She tells her followers that although she is worshipped “in many aspects, known by countless names, and propitiated with all manner of different rites,” the whole world still venerates her. To the philosopher, by appeasing the Roman authorities and participating in their public religious duties, the Christians would still be honoring their God. As the philosopher states, “to love the emperor and to serve God are complementary duties.” The Christians should not be afraid to hail to their emperor for they would be “swearing by the man to whom all earthly power has been given” by their God. Along the same lines, Christians would not be going against their God and they would be doing what is best for the Roman Empire as a whole. Communal unity was an extremely important value to the Romans. The citizens of the Roman Empire should realize that they have certain responsibilities to help provide for the common good of the empire. In order for the empire to survive, all must abide by the rules of the emperor, or else risk being conquered by barbarians. According to Plato, the “State and polity come first, and those laws are best, where there is observed as carefully as possible throughout the whole State.” He goes on to say that, “whether [this condition] anywhere exists now, or ever will exist,no one will ever lay down another definition that is truer or better than these conditions in point of super-excellence.” Platos thinking supports the Roman philosopher, with them both agreeing that the need of the state and the need for citizens to follow its laws is paramount. For one set of laws to rule over everything is impossible and the state that they have in practice is the best possible one that actually works, not necessarily the best one they could mentally create. In the treatise of the Roman philosopher he agrees with Platos theory by saying that it would be a spectacular ordeal if one set of laws could bring all nations under the same roof, “but to wish for this is to wish for nothing. We are citizens of a particular empire with a particular set of laws.” The Christians at least owe it to their empire to recognize their duties as citizens. They should help their emperor to accommodate for the common good, cooperate with the emperor as well as their fellow peers, and be willing to fight if it becomes necessary. The Platonist thinks that the Christians are irresponsible people who are dodging their public duties to the common good of the Roman Empire for a God from whom they have yet to be benefited.
This Roman philosopher believes Christianity to be illogical for various reasons. He finds it difficult to understand why anyone would want to proclaim to be a Christian if when one does,