Syrianus

I only learned quite recently about the 5th century philosopher Syrianus, a late neoplatonist.

I'm going to give you a rather lengthy italicized quote from him. He is discussing Aristotle, and in particular a critique Aristotle offered of both Plato and Pythagoras. 

I am not a natural controversialist, nor yet would I count myself as a disciple of Aristotle on merely a few or trivial topics; rather, I am one of those who admire both his logical methodology overall and who accept with enthusiasm his treatment of ethical and physical questions. And that I may not make a bore of myself by enumerating in detail all the excellent aspects of this man’s philosophy, let me just ask why every intelligent person might not justly marvel at the apt remarks, accompanied by demonstrations of the highest quality, to be found in this most excellent treatise on the subject of both forms in matter and definitions, and on the subject of the divine and unmoved transcendent causal principles of the whole cosmos—even though they are beyond the reach of any synthetic treatment and very detailed exposition—and declare the author of such a philosophical enquiry a benefactor of human life. For all he is owed the warmest thanks both from us and from all those who can appreciate his sagacity.


However, it is the fact that, for whatever reasons, both in other parts of his theological treatise and especially in the last two books, 13 and 14, he has indulged in a good deal of criticism of the first principles of the Pythagoreans and the Platonists, without saying anything pertinent or adequate against them, and in many instances, if one may state the truth quite frankly, not even meeting them on their own ground, but rather basing his objections on hypotheses propounded by himself. Because of this it seemed reasonable (in fairness to the less sophisticated students, that under the influence of the well-deserved reputation of the man they may not be seduced into contempt for divine realities and the inspired philosophy of the ancients) to examine his remarks critically and at the same time impartially as best we can, and to demonstrate that the doctrines of Pythagoras and Plato about the first principles remain free of disproof or refutation, while the arguments of Aristotle against them for the most part miss the mark and pursue lines of inquiry quite irrelevant to those divine men, while on the few occasions when they seek to make a direct attack on them, they are unable to bring to bear any refutation, large or small. And necessarily so; for ‘truth is never refuted’, in the words of that divine man (i.e. Plato, cf. Gorg., 473B), and in assimilating their arguments about first principles to the realities, the fathers of those arguments established them ‘as firmly and unshakably as it is proper for arguments to be’ (Tim., 29B7–8). Now that is enough by way of preface. 

(transl. Dillon and O’Meara, modified)

Syrianus was a pagan, and a devotee of the pagan tradition of philosophy. He was living in an Empire that had long since gone Christian. 

Some Christians had noticed Aristotle's critique of Pythagoreans and of Plato, and were using them as weapons against the pagan tradition.  We're generally taught that Christianity wouldn't follow or claim Aristotelianism as its own until much later, until we get to the height of medieval scholasticism. But this seems to be counter-evidence: Syrianus seems to have known Chrsitians who were making use of Aristotle the student against Aristotle's master, Plato, and one of HIS masters, Pythagoras, and implicitly the whole rest of the classical tradition.

  You can find the quote, and much more, here: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/syrianus/