The human being is determined by the spirit that accesses and prevails in his heart. This spirit becomes a homeland of honor and a heritage of our dignity. It, therefore, because the human soul is inevitably soulful, unique and indestructible reality, both, ontologicaly meaningful and eschatologicaly purposeful in it’s every effort, which simultaneously is in its righteousness and goodness, its opulence and wealth – our Garden of Eden and imperial palace, and in our grief and misery – a harsh desert for us and a dark tomb of our spirit. The same, human soul, by love can become the cherubs chariot of the God’s throne and the solemn bearer of His Holy Spirit.
All of this is happening to us according to a condition of our nature, depending on our humanity and commitment of the soul to a particular spirituality, by devoting of it indestructible and unstoppable life force, from desire and will, to a sense and reason, adopting the ideas and beliefs, knowledge and skills, our souls educates and upbrings to fulfill with the spirit and unite to essence.
Thus, the human being is wonderfully perfect, permanently invariable, unforgettably recognizable, pre-indicatively intended and indeed well determination of our nature that we nominate as personhood.
Because human is a kind of being that is capable of every possible existence, and that, with his consent, his own will, his subjectivity, his personality, gladly, by good deeds, prayers, all his thoughts and feelings, full life, overall inclusive love, remaining essentially beyond all of it, having inherent existence from God in himself, just as God’s presence in all that exists is not becoming any of that, except in a man, His Son and our Savior, Lord Jesus Christ!
Christian personhood is a category of entity that is above the relationship and responsiveness. It’s a love subjectivity and as love itself is unbiased, complete will to God as our Father and towards people, as Christian and brethren born, our person, without abolishment of certain relations and exclusion of itself from others, however, it remains above any sporadic, at the level of perfection of its overall heading, by grace deified, human nature.
By the fullness of love, the Christian personhood precedes and exceeds any particular relationship, being Church-determined in relation to God, supposing Him to all of its distinctive living and, at the same time, divine towards people, respecting them with all of its propriety as oneself.
Therefore, the personhood does not arises from our relations, but actually, it surpasses them with the beauty of an adherent, gathered and adjoined reality of being, suitably represented by it.
Consequently, as a surreal and perfect condition of our nature, only a personhood can contain and express an image and a likeness of God, since it is exactly assimilated and adapted to an improving essence of love, by the perfection that Trinitarian divinity exhibits within each and every person of God as a paragon of each other’s identity and affiliation to their common being, as without any confusion and separation as faith, hope and love are proclaiming each other, so it could be said that personhood is a truly pious humanity and that only in such a (personal) mood and manner, a man is capable of properly offering oneself to God and through a humble wanting and willing of a heart worthily mentioning Him, so that would have been filled with His Holy Spirit and assimilated in same way like bread and wine into an honorable gifts in order to be transformed and converted in His home, His Body and His Holy Orthodox Church, what kind of the gates of hell will never prevail against it.
At the same time, the personhood is a testimony of God and the Church, as a kind of pane through which a clear and healthy mental vision can notice and experience supernaturality of deity. Also, personhood is a cosmological state of all essences and equally inseparable, both from its nature and from its identity. As a matter of fact, the very nature of personhood is exclusively divine and it is causeless to its essence, since they are mutually originated. Aside of essence, the personhood is equally inconceivable and incomprehensible as the impersonal and featureless essence.
Also, personhood is a subjective factor of the unity of all that exists. It can be called and considered a relation in an absolute sense, by the respective inclusion of the entire being. It is an evenness of your uniqueness with all of the existence. It is a natural way of existence and an in tune living by perfect being of own nature in unconditional mutuality of individuals.
A nature is manifested as subjectivity through personhood, by producing a kind of relations as facts of its being. The way that one numerical unit contains each one and all of the numbering system, by a personhood, each and every person represents not only the essence, but also the identity of all the other congenial persons.
That is to say, a personhood is an etalon of beauty for all kinds of being. It does not abolish relationships but there is over and above them in its own nature. Persons establish and found their own relations, and it is not the same case vice versa, insofar as God is concerned.
Personal relationships are possible only within the same nature, ie, it is impossible to add, subtract, multiply, divide, merge or separate heterogeneous values in order to produce a personal subjectivity of any of them, or even less, of some quite new composite substances. That is why God has put on a man, that we might be draped in His divinity.
All of us, that much we are beings, as much we are human. As long as we do not become of people, ie, as long as any of us does not become a wholly human being, of such one, in no way can be said that he is a person. Until we adopt in ourself the whole humanness, as long as our individual will does not being healed and becomes completely of humankind, to the point, we will remain only individual human creatures, ie, decomposing and deconstructed nature deprived of the fullness of their natural qualities. And that, of course, can not happen devoid and in lack of the grace, without receiving the redemption and salvation of Christ’s sacrifice.
So, all rational creatures are spiritual beings, and of spiritual indivisible nature that as personalities possess integrally without confusion. A true relationship is a consequence of the personhood of spiritual essence. What is an impersonal, can not actively participate in any form of relationship. A Personhood contains the entire identity of existence. In the partial relations, personality turns in to a dead identity and becomes an individual, that is, when we participate in something partially or with any kind of restraint, ie, not with a whole heart and of the passionless love, but for the sake of a sinful and selfish interests, then we put on a mask of false identity, ceasing to be human at all.
Thus, a personhood is the possession of being or an aesthetics of essence and as such, only to incomprehensible Godhead is immanent naturally. It is different than other persons not by distinguishing of will, knowledge, skill, kindness, wisdom and other virtues that completely possess by its natural dignity, but, the way it identifies the existing in itself, ie, by the identification of their being, or rather, by remarkable worship share and praising the wealth of their indivisible being that mutually in a wholeness possess.
As follows, a reasonable being is always someone, like each human voice that is unrepeatable and everyone’s sensibility is emphatically indescribable, though, all that identity belongs to the same essence of certain species and to a common being that exclusively refers to the entities of personhood.
A person is being born and stems out of the personhood, gaining a fullness of the very same being that differently exists in a mutual love. Wealth of the Godhead is actually a riches of love or inexhaustible treasures of being with an overall beauty of existance, an abundance of personality and identity of the living.
Thus, the identity of a person does not originate from the relationship, but the beauty of being that is unique to each person, because, on the other hand, our personal relationships are based on respect of kinship and mutual peculiarity of a single being.
Therefore, the relationship is without any ontological content of itself, and the communities, when constituted simply by the acts of interrelations, such are of a political nature, but, if there is also a presence of a moral ideal, such are personal, ie, of a spiritual nature.
The concept of personhood based on the otherness is completely meaningless. It attempts to establish an ontology on a certain phenomenology of otherness, ie, personality. That kind of person is an unsustainable and indeterminable entity of a conditional personality with а random distinctiveness of а modern and imaginary individual.
Ontological primacy of distinguishing personality tailored to the individual, partial and ineffective entities of communal eminence, that, through the republican model of social relevance, as a kind of political commonwealth, consensually establishes its essentiality of a spurious divinity, is nothing more than an act of a rebellion insurgency and a separation from original nature, only because of a mindless pride.
And when it comes to God as a supreme being of ultimate integrity, there is no other appropriate way of His existence besides that of the Holy Trinity. His hyper-essential will which is love, can not be brought to a more resembling mode of existence, rather than subjectivity of the Father, neither more suitable disclosed to existing, than by subjectivity of the Son, nor explain His divinity in more vivid notions and more intimate sentiments, but within the Holy Spirit. Expression of Godhead will is taking place with an active simultaneous participation of all its divine personalities, through one of them, according to a conforming specificity of each.
Thus, the deeds of God are always being conducted and performed by an active involvement and engagement of all hypostases, either from, through, or within one of them, likewise their personal relationships are established out of the same transcendent content, without any kind of ontological dividing or differentiation. To one another, they are entirely inherent denominators and numerators of the same indivisible treasures they hold. Their monarchy expresses an autocratic, self-consistent and sublimely dignified nobility of the being that naturally belongs to the Son, and also, as a spiritual reality, never the less to the Holy Spirit, since both of them are equally honorable participants that have never lagged behind after the Father’s principle of The Holy Trinity, The Consubstantial and The Indivisible, Which is to save us.
Possession of personality is in fact owning of а love identity with which we acquire grace, ie, a divine gift of participation in the deed of love, which is nothing other than shedding of blood for the acquisition of spirit and laying of the soul, her temporary wear and loss, just for а permanent preservation and glorification, and even the use of the body (along with the physical wisdom) as the candle and a raising food seeds of а new life, The Word of God, the one and only true treasure that actually exists and can be continuously gained in itself and by which can be bought whole the Kingdom of Heaven, which is the unanimity in God.
The problem of understanding the personhood arises from improper apprehension of freedom, ie, its identification with looseness, licentiousness and other forms of casual and irresponsible behavior, which causes many misunderstandings, confusions, controversies and disputes nowadays of a human salvation.To such, so much erroneous concept of freedom comes because of the self-justification of such an improper conduct, which, as a paralyzing poison dulls the sense of human freedom as a soul’s noblest capability of receiving, preserving and tradition of love pledged in our origin, ie, in our very nature that as an icon of God, a measure and an artfulness of divinity, can be actuated towards its archetype (the divine being) only by the personality of The Holy Trinity, operational of the Father, through the Son, within the Holy Spirit.
Consequently, freedom is the the most comprehensive capability of existence and the possibility of being as a gift of love, through and whitin the love itself as an ultimate gift, the purpose of all the inspiration and the aim of all the charisma. Therefor, the being could not anyhow be intrusive for the real freedom, and anyway, it can not presents any kind of burden or onus, since the freedom has been given to us because of the nature of our being primarily.
Proper apprehension of freedom inherent to every conscious being is very helpful in understanding the phenomenon of our personality, wich by freedom, ie, by spiritual sensitivity towards being, can be consensually gained within oneself and willingly shown to everyone, while as an order, it may also be instructed and commanded to all that exists.
Freedom is the power of repentance and capability of obedience to God, but personhood – it’s the very act and honor (taking an active part) of deification. Human personhood (much less the divine) is not just a “way of being” of some sort of essence, but exclusively an Orthodox Christianity of man (thanks and praise God). It is not some imagination through or a mere imitation, but, a total commitment and belonging of а man to God and an immediate symbolic linking of oneself being and destiny to the hyper-essential will of His, delivered to us without any residue, through the Holy Gospel of the Son of God, and our Lord Jesus Christ.
Checking the claims about freedom to its etymological grounds confirms the meaning of my sense of freedom, that it is, above all, a love gift of divinity in the possibility for achievement the perfection of human nature through the mysterious life of the Body of Christ and for acquiring the divinity through an evangelical living of such a regenerated, healed and iconized human nature by the divine personality of the Son of God, and our Lord Jesus Christ.
Simplified, freedom is the economy of salvation of human nature as a constitutional order of its decency dedicated to be offered for a transfiguration and a new living of an infinite life of Godhead.
Gaining of personality is unattainable to a man by own forces and way of being, because our natural place is besides God, in the midst of His divine nature, shining with brilliance and beauty of His personality, our nature gets celebrated with personality, as a reflection and glint of divinity.
On the other hand, God is perfect and His personality is quite natural (consubstantial) to Himself. A divine person does not produces its essence out from the way of existence, ie, identity, either in or outside itself (so to speak, ecstatically), but of oneself, by oneself and whitin oneself, He totally inherently contains, expresses and manifests it to an existence.
The self-proclaimed theology of divine personality, according to a human weakness and a need for freedom from liability, considers the personhood of God by imagining it separated from His hyper-essential nature and presupposing it as her cause and aim.
This paradoxical statement is the negation of the very notion of personhood and it introduces an ontological absurd of immoral existance as an absolut kind of being, that is to say, God is not good by nature and nothing well is naturally characteristic of Him, but, He becomes such by the measure of his fatherhood, sonship or spirituality, i.e., that He may wants to, and in accordance with such foolishness, become bed and evil! Otherwise, these “scholars” can not accept Him as an almighty God (worthy of them), attributing Him their own inability to let Himself free of own being, exactly what they are already trying to do, not only themselves, but even with Him.
Thinking that God could be bothered by His own nature and that He exists regardless and irrespectively of it, then, that all of His natural characteristic are the consequences of his personal qualities, is in fact, the greatest possible insult that can be applied to God, that by nature He is not sufficiently powerful and good, i.e. that by nature is unworthy of His own distinctiveness, or otherwise, that by personality He is insufficiently capable to deal with own nature as such.
The very idea that one can realize and express the being of God and form a single ontological doctrine of God is the greatest possible delusion to human mind. Without exception, all the holy fathers agree that God’s being is absolutely inaccessible and unknowable, and that knowledge of God is possible only through the grace-filled energies that by The Holy Trinity are always hypostaticaly available to us, of the Father, through the Son, within the Holy Spirit. Therefore, since the being of God is above all comprehension, confirmation and denial, there can be no question of divine ontology as the gnostic system, and least of all, with its center in intelligible and richly definable notion of personhood.
Scholastic epistemology and its latest product – a modern deconstructionist theology based on the occult concept of personality as the subject of initiation of the divine reality, claiming that the Father, by His personal existence and drawing up of other hypostases, according to his will and at His discretion establishes the essence of divinity is an obvious attempt to present a hyper-essential nature of divinity as a personal quality and status of Father’s hypostasis, for an evidence of the ontological primacy of personality.
Such a teaching abolishes the very metaphysics, because according to it, actually there is no such an uncreated and hyper-natural essence of Godhead, and a divinity itself is the result of an arbitrary oddity and diversity, ie, modes of a being (community) of a certain three, and moreover, that their mutual relations of such a vicarious and titular character are the only essence of the divinity itself, or otherwise, that the modes of coexistence are an emanation of their identicalness to a single essence. All of that, leads us to the conclusion that it is a case of a reverse Sabellianism, that, according to the unifying principle of an essence-creative relationships, by the modalities of identity emanates the same essence.
The highlight of this completely non-Orthodox teachings is being reached by claiming that “God is one just because He is a Father”, ie, due to the unique source of His personal existence, or in other words, God is not one by the equality and uniqueness of His divine being that is indivisibly present in the Holy Trinity as the same and unique Godhead in all of them, but, becouse of the sole causer of their distinctive existence in the person of God the Father, in the sense that even the Father Himself becomes God as the fact of his personality and as the consequence of His relationships within the Holy Trinity, that is to say, that His divine being is a side effect of His personal existence.
The main exponent of this dangerous science, persistently trying to impose the ontological primacy of the notion of personhood and to establish the subjectivism as a source of a being, besides the features of a recognition of God the Father that were determined by the holy fathers and established by the Holy Spirit, for Him as a monarch and a sole causer of the Trinitarian personal existence of Godhead, ascribes to the person of God the Father a completely unfamiliar and uncharacteristic trait, that even for Himself He causes His own divine being, ie, that the Father attributively imagines, deifies, and by His distinctive discretion, brings Himself in to existence (creates oneself?) as an absolute being.
According to this, it turns out that Christians really do not have a unique and consubstantial God, but, instead, a community of gods on the agreed principles of mutual co-existence, by which, they dynamicaly relational establish the identity of each other as the nature and the essence of their community.
The ontological theory of personality is cunning attempt of interpretation of the Orthodox patristic theology in the light of postmodern philosophy of existentialism, which, as based on atheistic humanism, seeks to justify the decadence of unfaithful mankind, relativising and reducing the dignity of a human nature in its concrete individual existence within the historical context of the world and civilization, liberating the conscience of an individual from an absolute, moral, right and true model of a human being, subordinating it to a relative, ethically correct, an unscrupulous and hypocritically adjustable likeness in the function of an imperative of our own survival, of course, obscurely understood in the domain of existence.
Just following the example of existentialism, it realizes the existence only ecstatically, in the ambiental and environmental milieu that to individuals is only an external, meditative and variable fact of their subjective identity. This spiritual mediation of the mediocre entity of so called community, that substitutes the being of own consciousness and disables subjectivity of a sovereign existence, instead of enabling the growth of an individual in to a person, it turns the faint-hearted individuals in the weapons of utilitarian collectivism, ie, into marionettes and articulators of somebody’s arbitrariness.
And even more than that, this views declaim their authors as fanatical followers of deconstructionism, a hardened opponents of the very idea of immanence and a spiritual sworn brothers to the greatest nihilists as such are Derrida, Levinas, Heidegger and Nietzsche. How else to qualify such views that all the creation, since composed from nothingness (“ex nihilo”, the Latin way he misinterpreted the biblical original expression “out of nothing”), is by nature and essentially worthless, meaningless and futile. Of such the heterodox reasons, on deeming the death for a loss and the end of the existence of nothingness, some of those, found their own fatal doctrines of the mortality of the human soul.
What do they overlooked in their doctrines of being and existence is the fact that non-being is not an essence, does not precedes the existence, neither the being, neither immortality, nor any of the virtues that are of uncreated deeds of God, so that does not ontologically conditions or determines the power and ability of God’s creation, neither created beings itself, to what extent they will naturally participate in the divine virtues and deeds. The creation “out of nothing” does not condition the creatures with the natural tendency toward nothingness, but rather, to an existence, because it deprives them of the ability to decompose at something and as such disappear. This misconception stems from the ungraceful reasoning and a distorted interpretation of the words of the Holy Scripture and the Holy Tradition, that God created from nothingness (ex nihilo), artistically processing the content of non-authenticity of the so called “nothing”, so to speak, by converting nothingness into being, which, together with such claims, presents the malicious oxymoron borrowed from a totally false fabrications nihilism.
In fact, they believe that all the creation and its essence are invalid, ie, prone to dissolution and non-being from which it was allegedly substantially composed, which is why they come to the wrong conclusion that the created nature cannot participate in the existence, life, immutability, and all the other virtues as a deeds of God, since that thereby, according to him, by taking participation in such a deed of the Creator, even a creature might gain natural characteristics of divinity. However, the essence of each creature lies in the cause of, ie, in the word (logos) by which God intended and explained its genesis and existence in eternity, according to which, non-being is absolutely unnatural tendency of distraught and confused consciousness of the gnomically frivolous and bewildered reasonable creatures.
In addition, they argue that the reason for mortality (whereby implie the cessation of an ecstatic existence) of creatures is the fact that they have an actual beginning of their existence, to such a logic, that everything that has a beginning is therefore separated, ie, divided by the time and space of the other creatures and beings, from where they draw an analogy, that therefore it is a subject to a separation, division, dissolution and death. In other words, they claim that everything created, by being determinable and having a beginning of its existence is therefore sentenced to death, and then the dialectically opposite, that what is uncreated has no beginning, nor the end of its existence, and therefore is immortal. But unfortunately for a turbulent syllogism of theirs, according to St. Gregory Palamas, the divine energies are uncreated, but some of them have a beginning and an end, for example, the creative energy of God, as according to the Holy Scripture, God finished the creation and “rested from all deeds that He had done.” If we follow the their logic, the creative power of God should also has been created and this is precisely the heresy involved in the teaching of the scholasticism of Calabrian Barlaam.
Therefore, sophistically proclaimed dialectic of created and the uncreated, is not absolutely analogous to the pair of a temporary and the eternal. In the Orthodox theological tradition, mortality is not a direct consequence and not derived from createdness of being, and the soul of a man, in spite that counts as a creature, it is also an immortal.
Since they consider a being only as a contextual identity of ecstatic differentiation, they dispute God’s potency and power of creating an eternally existing and indestructible essences, as such is the human soul. They argue that the soul exists only by the grace, losing out of sight that the grace is defined as a conscious and consensual receiving of the complementary, perfecting and deifying gifts of love in the Holy Spirit.
The rhetorical dilemma according to which the human soul as a created entity can’t possess its own natural power of continuous existence, overlooks the fact that the very constitution of the soul, after all, as well as of each individual creature, is the result of an action of an uncreated and the essence-creative force of God, from which follows, that there is nothing that could be taken into consideration or properly understood, neither for itself could be as such as it really is separated from its Creator.
Thereby guided, since all that happens has become as the result of an impact of the enhypostatic and the uncreated divine energies, therefore, without any exception, not only an essences of all the creatures, but also, each occurrence of their existence, regardless of the character, all the events could be simply considered as of grace, without excluding from subsuming and classifying into the category of grace neither the appearance of the fiercest pain, hatred, falsehood and evil.
Thus, the Orthodox Christian would not even dare to challenge the truth that all the existence, as well as any virtue of creatures, is in fact, only their participation in the hyper-essential and uncreated energies of the Pantocrator, but, what the idiomatically fallen logic of those who philosophize is unable to comprehend is the fact that the mere participation in the deeds of God is being attained and gained on the basis of natural conformation and establishment of the creatures themselves, ie, depending on their natural abilities that in the final instance characterize each individual essence with the symbolism of its theological significance, whereby, the attributes and properties of all creatures are being transformed into their primarily predetermined functional purpose as the instruments and articulators of the acts of grace – the executive of a comprehensive and mildest will of God, that is love.
As for us humans, except the predetermination of a reasonable soul as a self-propelled, unstoppable and according to the image of God created, cosmogonically mindful nature of ours, we were given and the cosmological, ie, a devising, judging and nominatively decisive instance of being that we call personality, dedicated for selection, acceptance and implementation of the grace of the Son of God and our Lord Jesus Christ, as an exclusive establisher and perpetrator of our subsistential perfection and maturity eligible of eternal living with God in the communion of the Holy Spirit.
The soul is a man, and the body – a world. Man lives in the body like in his own world and that’s the world that, by abstaining, fasting and praying, he should preserve and save in the blessed human shape, in order to gain within it a contribution of his own deification and an eternal holy life. Because human nature is an object, and the person – a subject of life in Christ, where many are one and the same body and the members to one another. The inner man is a plenipotentiary of his soul and the external, in order to took a part in the spiritual life would have to be governed by the soul, subordinating his personality in order of characterisation and healing of the being.
One of the greatest misconceptions of modern theology is the confusion and substitution of a notion about personality with the concept of identity of otherness within the community, that thereby, among other things, theoretically conditions the ability of existence and characterizes death as a synonym for the disappearance of the human soul. Teaching that the soul dies loosing the identity and consciousness of itself isn’t true for a reason because the identity is just a manifestation of being, in the field of relations, unlike the person, to which was given the ability of love, ie, of spiritual life. But after the final verdict, the beloved identity of the convicted ones completely remains to characterize them in eternity, but, since running out of the capability to be persons, they must continue their damned existence, retaining the identity by which they represented themselves.
It is wrong to claim that the existence in hell happens due to the grace, because grace is a transmission of the whole will and providence of God to His spiritual creatures the most important one of which is the human soul, to their natural structure, through their effective compliance and grateful acceptance.
If the existence of a soul in everlasting hellish torturing is the result of an action of grace, then it would certainly be a subject to rejection and disappearance, respectively, of an effective nihilism. In contrast, the existence in hell continues just because of the natural communion of spiritual beings with the life-giving, all-pervasive, uncreated and eternal energies of God, and does not depend on a reasonable compliance of souls that stay in it, so it can not be considered as a grace that is personal and subjective communion with the will of God, which is indeed the most precious gift one can get, accept or reject, while the rest is a matter of structural necessity of the spiritual essence of humanity.
Finally, could we regard the unwanted or undesired as some kind of a gift? Because, those who are tormented in hell no longer care about a life and existence, and would gladly, if only they could, and if it somehow depends of their will, immediately vanish into nothingness! Nonetheless, just because of her freedom from the threat and fear of disappearance, and hence the unconditioned and unlimited by weakness or impotence, a way and character of her subjectivity, the existence of a soul is by creation breathed and woven into her nature, exactly for the sake of which, she must not and can’t reject it subjectively, because the quality of a being is the man’s source of dignity and freedom of existence, and by committing suicide, the man does not refuses only his particular appearance as the existence of an individual, but, its general human cause, reason and purpose, which is to fulfill the designation and purposefulness of humanity to its grateful and sacramental inclusion in the Theanthropic organism of Christ’s Church and a blessed essential existence empowered and glorified by the deity.
The creators of such teachings, to say so, do not even touch upon the issue of Incarnation of the Son of God, probably, in order to avoid a substantial foundation of the gospel of Christ and the irreplaceable role and importance of the human nature in the constitution of our salvation, because, if the being was only a phenomenon of mutual relations, The Son of God would have never incarnate in a man from the Virgin Mother of God, the One that has emerged from the royal lineage of king David and from the knee of the high priest Aron, in order to, starting from Himself, by Himself and within Himself, establish and made a humankind in the holiness of the royal priesthood! Thereby, to each one of us has entrusted the duty and liability for the soul as an overall universe of humanity, encouraging us on the accomplishment of living boldly, resolutely and steadfastly in pious holiness, that therefor, through abstinence and by keeping away from sin to gain grace and subjectivity of lords and rulers of our own nature and to become an emperors of soul’s forces of all humanity that is invested in us without any residue through the Christ and the Word of God, in order to made of ourselves, as of the sinful passions liberated people, a forth fruits worthy of repentance, such that could be offered to God to the adoption and sanctification in Christ, God and the Savior of mankind.
The Orthodox Tradition of the notion of human existence is most concisely expressed in the liturgical call to “commit ourselves and one another and our whole life to Christ our God”, which clearly shows to every Orthodox Christian that he posses in oneself his own authentically subsistent, unquenchable and indestructible natural existence, that, if he wants for oneself and for his loved ones, to get enriched by the presence and the attributes of the divine being, following the example the Most Holy Theotokos, he may hand it over to Christ our God.
So, if Heidegger, only after two thousand years came on the idea to point out that issue right in the focus of interest of philosophy and finally take into consideration the meaning of essence and being, then, we must not forget that the Orthodox have always kept in mind such a wisdom, that it is about the eternal well-being, which isn’t an unambiguous and simply expedient, but, according to a diverse predetermined natures of creatures, so, even the eternal well-being would not be possible otherwise and beyond the created being, and least of all, by the theanthropic personality of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.
Attempting to presents the orthodoxy attractively and in a marketing manner as philosophically actual and culturally avant-garde system of thought, this widely affirmed theologians, in their delusions exceed even the existentialists, bringing themself to an unprecedented height of hermeneutic deception, shaped into the postulates of hyper-essential nature of God, as phenomenological excerpt, metaphorical complex and allegorical synonym of the hypostatic existence.
It is a great condescension and unjustifiable charity in favor of their theological standpoint, that to be qualified only as an imposed otherness and difference instead of grace, because in Trinitarian terms, it postulates personality instead of the very divinity and hyper-essential being of God.
The need for such freedom in love is actually requiring proof for faith and conditioning of a hope with miracles, and therefor, instead of Christianity and personality, it contributes us to a depersonalization and disfiguration due to the pride, hypocrisy and ruthlessness of ancient (or contemporary) Hellenes and Jews.