De Trinitate and Contra Varimadum - English translations

Steven Avery

Administrator
From:

The Witness of God is Greater

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1YxGsgMJVzjWcabaS8QDRl-Gnia4EwseL/view

===================================

De Trinitate Libr Duodecim -
Authorship uncertain discussed elsewhere. Most are now thought to be in the late fourth century. The last one, Book X, is likely fifth century.

===================================

● Bk I.50
In conclusion: although the names of the Divine Persons are implied in the passages of Scripture mentioned above, nevertheless it must always be evident that for all three the validity of the only name of the divinity is proved. In the same way, this doctrine is illustrated in this other passage of Scripture. In it, quite clearly, the names of the Divine Persons are expressed, and together the unique name of the divine nature is confirmed, since this is precisely how John the Evangelist expresses himself in his letter: "There are three who bear witness in heaven: the Father and the Word and the Holy Spirit, and in Christ Jesus they are one."
(De Trinitate Book 1 : CCSL 9:14)
Ps.-Athanasius/ps.-Eusebius Vercellensis, De Trinitate I, CCSL 9:14 (cf. PL 62:243): “

===================================

This one only counts as an allusion.

● Bk I.55
And for the same reaction every time it is a question of People they are designated with personal names; whereas, instead, when we speak of divinity, a unique name is referred to; in fact the term "we are" clearly indicates in plural form the names of the Persons. Therefore, the expression "they are one" must refer only to the deity, while the other expression "they are three" refers to the name of the Persons. It follows that "three" constitute one, or even that "one thing is all three."
(De Trinitate Book 1 : CCSL 9:15)

===================================

● Bk I.69
And yet, if it is true that the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit are one in the divinity, I beg you to bring me the proofs of the Law. You have already heard the evangelist John, in his epistle, testifies so perfectly: "They are three who bear witness in heaven, the Father and the Word and the Spirit, and in Christ Jesus they are one." (1 John 5: 7) 61 [70]. Certainly, it must be held as a basis that in the divinity, as to their unique and complete essence, they are one, while in the names of the Persons there are three. And then, in order for you to be well informed through all that I previously explained, I intended to demonstrate that in the fullness of the divinity of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit a division or difference of any kind is not admissible.
(De Trinitate Book 1; CCSL 9:19)
Ps.-Athanasius/ps.-Eusebius Vercellensis, De Trinitate I, CCSL 9:19 (cf. PL 62:246):

Porson claims this one (the quotation at the end of the first book) is not in the the old Paris nor Cologne editions. And falsely claims that the shorter reading is much better connected.

===================================

● Bk V.46.
But the Holy Spirit exists in the Father, and in the Son, and in himself, 47. just as John the Evangelist testifies so perfectly in his Epistle: “And these three are one” (1 Jn 5.7). Moreover, why is it called one, if anything concerning it is divided into parts? And why is it called one, if anything concerning it is perceived in different ways? 48. And how, O heretic, are the three one, if the substance is divided or separated in them? Or how are they one, if one is placed above another? Or how are the three one, if there are different divinities in them? How are they one, if there is not in them a united, eternal fullness of divinity? Moreover, just as a single fullness has no division at all into any part, is not a united fullness of divinity unable to be spoken of as having a greater or lesser part?
(De Trinitate Book 5 : CCSL 9:76-77; Translated by Dr. Jake Lake, 2018)

Porson claims this one (the quotation .. in the fifth) is not in the the old Paris nor Cologne editions. And falsely claims that the shorter reading is much better connected.

===================================

● Bk VII.10.
Why is it that with this name one finds that God is everywhere honored? Certainly, because in this very name of the Trinity baptism is celebrated in the unity of divinity. Why do you read that the evangelist John stated that "three is one thing" (I John 5: 7), if you then mean that they exist with different natures? How can you assert that there is the gift of a single baptism, according to the testimony of Scripture, if then you assert that different natures are in them? And why do you celebrate a regular baptism according to the rite, and then, in professing the only name of the Trinity, blaspheme?
(De Trinitate Book 7 : CCSL 9:94-95)

===================================

● Bk X

Heretic:
It is established in my heart that you are not ignorant to the superior, reasonable and true exposition. But for the consummation of faith, I ask you to explain, why the persons and names are divided, when there is one substance of Father, and Son, and Holy Spirit?

Athanasius:
Do you not know that the Father is one God, and the Son is one God, and the Holy Spirit is one God? It is one Name, because one is Their Substance. Which is why also John says in his epistle: There are Three who give testimony in heaven, Father, Word and Spirit, and They are One [unum, neuter] in Christ Jesus. Yet not one [unus, masculine], because not one is Their Person. Surely, can it be understood otherwise that if the Father is truly One [unus] who begets, He must not be the same also who is begotten by Himself? And if the Son is One [unus] who does not beget, He must not be the Father? And that the Holy Spirit, who is nor Father nor Son, must be a different Person, if He is in addition referenced as one who neither begets nor is born?

(Heretics questions, the response of Catholics : On the Trinity, Book 10; Translated by Jeroen Beekhuizen, correspondence, March 2020)
Ps.-Athanasius, De Trinitate X, CCSL 9:145 (cf. PL 62:297)

==========

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1YxGsgMJVzjWcabaS8QDRl-Gnia4EwseL/view
 
Last edited:

Steven Avery

Administrator
Contra Varimadum

Idacius Clarus. Contra Marivadum (Varimadum) Arianum (circa 350-385 AD)

● Question: If someone should say that the Son in the Gospel has said: My Father is Greater than I (John 14:28).

Answer: The Son is inferior to the Father when he assumes human form, but is truly equal to the father in nature of divinity and essence, it is he again who testifies: I and my Father are one. (John 10:30) And again: He that hathseen me hath seen the Father. (John 14:9) And also: That all men should honour the Son, even as they honour the Father. (John 5:23) And again: That they may be one, even as we are one: I in them, and thou in me. (John 17:22) And again: And all mine are thine, and thine are mine. (John 17:10) And again: All things that the Father hath are mine. (John 16:15) And again: I am in the Father, and the Father in me. (John 14:10) And again: The Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works. (John 14:10) And John the evangelist says: In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. (John 1:1) Also to the Parthians: "there are three", he says, "that bear witness in earth, the water, the blood and the flesh (body): and these three are in us." (1 John 5:8) "and there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Spirit: and these three are one." (1 John 5:7) And so we believe that the Father and the Son are in the nature of divinity, by which they are One; nor (do we think) that the Father preceded in time so that he is greater than the Son, or that the Son was born later, so that the divinity of the Father is diminished in the Son.

(Idacius Clarus, Contra Varimadum (Marvidamun), Book 1. Chapter 5; CCSL 90:20-21; Migne Latina, PL 62 359)
 
Last edited:

Steven Avery

Administrator
Scholars today on the dating and recension questions:

Daniel Harrison Williams
Institute for Studies of Religion - Baylor University
254/710-7555 - ISR@baylor.edu
http://www.baylorisr.org/scholars/w/daniel-williams/
1626199398053.png


Lorenzo Dattrino
http://www.aracneeditrice.it/index.php/autori.html?auth-id=ldrmpulip
1626199439545.png


Junghoo Kwon - junghookwon@hotmail.com
http://www.lifeun.edu.kh/php/junghoo.php


TitleProfessor of Theology
DepartmentDepartment of Theology
CollegeArts, Humanity & Language
Affiliation
E-mailjunghookwon@hotmail.com

The Witness of God is Greater

Manlio Simonetti (1926-)
http://www.zam.it/biografia_Manlio_Simonetti
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patristic_Institute_Augustinianum
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ratzinger_Foundation

Irene Dingel, Kestutis Daugirdas -
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irene_Dingel
Antitrinitarische Streitigkeiten: Die tritheistische Phase (1560–1568)
https://books.google.com/books?id=n0dr9UPa1d0C&pg=PA560

Ravenna in Late Antiquity: AD; 7. Ravenna capital: 600-850 AD (2010)
Deborah Mauskopf Deliyannis
https://books.google.com/books?id=YSLi46ZIEHoC&pg=PA178
1626200535072.png

1626200623929.png
 
Last edited:

Steven Avery

Administrator
Recensions and/or mss. discussed and heavenly witnesses.

===========================

On Eusebius of Vercelli (1900)
Andrew Ewbank Burn
https://www.jstor.org/stable/23949376
https://books.google.com/books?id=q8lDAQAAMAAJ&pg=PA592

I. In a MS of Canons in the Vatican Library (Cod. Vatic. 1319)
Mr. Turner found some portions (Books I, II, VI, VII) of the work of pseudo-Vigilius de Trinitate. The name Sancti Eusebii is found between Books II and VI, and is given at the beginning of the volume as the name of the author.

1626325219063.png

1626325283984.png

1626325634290.png


===========================

Review: De Trinitate libri X-XII by Pseudo-Athanasii, Manlio Simonetti (1958)
Herbert Musurillo -
https://www.jstor.org/stable/41518792


And thus it is X, XI, and XII which are here chosen by Dr. Simonetti for the Bologna edition ...

For the Expositio (or book X of the original edition) Simonetti has used five MSS, some fragments of a fine eighth century Verona codex and the quotations in the libellus emendationis which the Council of Carthage forced the Pelagian Bishop Leporius to sign in token of recantation. In this way the substance of the Expositio became incorporated in early doctrine. ...

The next opusculum, or Book XI, is entitled Professio fidei et confessio catholica and would seem again to have the appearance of a composite work ... The textual tradition ... is not quite so full as for the previous opusculiun, but the stemmatic relationship of the extant MSS is very much the same.

The third work (or Book XII), De Trinitate et de Spiritu sancto, is a much more organic composition. It is primarily a polemic treatise, a libellus apotogeticus, directed against the Pneumatomachi (or the heretics who denied the divinity of the Holy Spirit), although its conciliatory tone suggests that is may also have been intended for Christians who were not formally heretics but had begun to have doubts about this aspect of Trinitarian doctrine. Here the manuscript evidence is very copious ... the eighteen extant manuscripts which were collated,

===========================

Letters of Eusebius of Vercelli and the Authorship of the De Trinitate: Did Eusebius of Vercelli Write the Pseudo-Athanasian De Trinitate? (2010)
Junghoo Kwon
https://www.readcube.com/articles/10.1163/18177565-90000040

First the circular part:


Morin is also aware of the problem of "the famous verse of three heavenly testimonies," that is, the Johannine Comma, in terms of his Eusebian hypothesis.10 This Johannine Comma which the author of the De Trinitate cites twice in its complete form,11 Morin notes, "appears for the first time ... in the recently discovered writings of the Spaniard Priscillian."12 This suggests that the De Trinitate comes from Spain, not from Northern Italy. He further acknowledges another difficulty which his Eusebian hypothesis produces in relation to the Johannine Comma, that is, why after Eusebius no Italian bishop or even before him cites this text and why none of his contemporaries (Hilary and Lucifer of Caliari), nor later key Latin Fathers (Ambrose, Jerome and Augustine) have ever appealed to it.13 Two years later in 1900, Morin withdrew completely from the Eusebian hypothesis and came up with the suggestion that Gregory of Elvira might have been the author.

(10) Tres sunt, qui testimonium dicunt in caelo, pater et uerbum et spiritus, et in Christo Iesu unum simt [1 John 5:7],
(11) De Trinitate 1. 50, 69.
1626326191844.png

the pseudo-Athanasian treatise comes down to us in two recensions; Recension I is shorter and unanimously considered prior to the second recension. Recension II is longer due to its correction and expansion of Recension I. When we speak of the pseudo-Athanasian De Trinitate and its authorship, we are referring not to the last five books (VIII–XII) but to the first seven books (I–VII) which “form a cohesive ensemble attributable to a single author.”7 The remaining five books are outside of the present study.

(7) Williams, Ambrose of Milan... 97.

Agreeing with Bulhart and other Eusebian scholars before him, Williams holds that the first seven books of the De Trinitate comprise a unified whole and the remaining five books have nothing to do with the first seven. He also adopts Bulhart’s proposal that the author of the first seven is Eusebius of Vercelli. Yet he finds Bulhart’s chronology (345–347 for the first recension and sometime after 357 for the second recension)26 quite troublesome and comes up with his own, which was, in fact, first proposed by Morin (1898). He dates the mysterious treatise to be some time between Eusebius’ return from exile and his death, that is, between “late 362/early 363” and 370/1, preferably close to the later date.27 Here are Williams’ main arguments which have led him to conclude that the De Trinitate was probably written by Eusebius of Vercelli during the later years of the 360s. Williams’ hypothesis that “there is nothing in the De Trinitate which Eusebius could not have said” begins with two solid historical facts; the bishop of Vercelli had been exiled in the East “for over seven years;” he also participated in the Council of Alexandria in 362 before his return to the West.28 From the first historical datum, he theorizes that a long stay in the East might have provided the bishop of Vercelli with “a broadened theological perspective.” His theorizing continues: (continues) p. 105

(27) Williams, Ambrose of Milan..., 98, no. 198. Elsewhere he dates the treatise somewhat differently: “there is no reason why the first recension could not have been written between the years 365–80” (p. 240).

(28) Ibid., 241.

The Nicene watchword "homoousios" appears only once at the closing moment of his entire treatise.36 Its Latin equivalent "unius substantiae (cum patre)" does not appear at all in Recension I. It appears once in Recension II in a substantially modified version of the Creed of Nicaea.37

(36) De Trinitate 7. 30.
(37) Ibid., 6. 9. II.

===========================

Ambrose of Milan and the End of the Arian-Nicene Conflicts (1997)
Daniel Harrison Williams
https://www.amazon.com/Ambrose-Arian-Nicene-Conflicts-Christian-Studies/dp/019826464X

p. 51 --- 96–103. See also Appendix III (239–242)

Worldcat
https://www.worldcat.org/title/ambr...-of-the-nicene-arian-conflicts/oclc/250007377

===========================
 
Last edited:

Steven Avery

Administrator
Contra Varimadum - (possibly anti-priscillianist Idacius Clarus AD 350)
And John the evangelist says: In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. (John 1:1) Also to the Parthians: "there are three", he says, "that bear witness in earth, the water, the blood and the flesh (body): and these three are in us." "and there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Spirit: and these three are one."
(Idacius Clarus, Contra Varimadum (Marvidamun), Book 1. Chapter 5; CCSL 90:20-21; Migne Latina, PL 62 359)


"And there are three who give testimony in heaven, the Father, The Word, and the Spirit, and these three are one." -
- Anchor Bible; Epistle of John - Contra Varimadum
 
Last edited:

Steven Avery

Administrator
1658015695888.png

1658015733643.png

1658015762756.png


RGA
Grantley
An understanding of how this may have happened is provided by some of the earliest citations of the comma, found in the De Trinitate attributed (erroneously) to Athanasius.68 The form of the comma cited in De Trinitate is as follows:

Tres sunt qui testimonium dicunt in cælo: Pater et Verbum et Spiritus, et in Christo Iesu unum sunt.69

69

Ps.-Athanasius/ps.-Eusebius Vercellensis, De Trinitate I, CCSL 9:14 (cf. PL 62:243):
“[…] Ergo quamuis in superioribus exemplis scribturarum tacita sint nomina personarum, tamen unitum nomen diuinitatis per omnia est in his demonstratum sicut et in hoc argumento ueritatis, in quo nomina personarum euidenter sunt ostensa et unitum nomen naturale cluse est declaratum, dicente Iohanne euangelista in epistula sua: Tres sunt, qui testimonium dicunt in cælo, pater et uerbum et spiritus, et in Christo Iesu unum sunt, non tamen unus est, quia non est
eorum una persona.”

Ps.-Athanasius/ps.-Eusebius Vercellensis, De Trinitate I, CCSL 9:19 (cf. PL 62:246):
“Iam audisti superius euangelistam Iohannem in epistula sua tam absolute testantem: Tres sunt, qui testimonium dicunt in cælo, pater et uerbum et spiritus, et in Christo Iesu unum sunt.”

Ps.-Athanasius, De Trinitate X, CCSL 9:145 (cf. PL 62:297):
“Vnde et Iohannes in epistula sua ait: Tres sunt qui testimonium dicunt in cælo, pater, uerbum et spiritus: et in Christo
Iesu unum sunt; non tamen unus est, quia non est eorum una persona.”
This section from book X appears to be a simple borrowing from the first section cited from book I.
 

Steven Avery

Administrator
These two are not in Grantley (plus the 9:15 allusion)

===================================

● Bk V.46.
But the Holy Spirit exists in the Father, and in the Son, and in himself, 47. just as John the Evangelist testifies so perfectly in his Epistle: “And these three are one” (1 Jn 5.7). Moreover, why is it called one, if anything concerning it is divided into parts? And why is it called one, if anything concerning it is perceived in different ways? 48. And how, O heretic, are the three one, if the substance is divided or separated in them? Or how are they one, if one is placed above another? Or how are the three one, if there are different divinities in them? How are they one, if there is not in them a united, eternal fullness of divinity? Moreover, just as a single fullness has no division at all into any part, is not a united fullness of divinity unable to be spoken of as having a greater or lesser part?
(De Trinitate Book 5 : CCSL 9:76-77; Translated by Dr. Jake Lake, 2018)

Porson claims this one (the quotation .. in the fifth) is not in the the old Paris nor Cologne editions. And falsely claims that the shorter reading is much better connected.

===================================

● Bk VII.10.
Why is it that with this name one finds that God is everywhere honored? Certainly, because in this very name of the Trinity baptism is celebrated in the unity of divinity. Why do you read that the evangelist John stated that "three is one thing" (I John 5: 7), if you then mean that they exist with different natures? How can you assert that there is the gift of a single baptism, according to the testimony of Scripture, if then you assert that different natures are in them? And why do you celebrate a regular baptism according to the rite, and then, in professing the only name of the Trinity, blaspheme?
(De Trinitate Book 7 : CCSL 9:94-95)

===================================
 

Oseas

Member
● Bk I.69
And yet, if it is true that the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit are one in the divinity, I beg you to bring me the proofs of the Law. You have already heard the evangelist John, in his epistle, testifies so perfectly: "They are three who bear witness in heaven, the Father and the Word and the Spirit, and in Christ Jesus they are one." (1 John 5: 7) 61 [70]. Certainly, it must be held as a basis that in the divinity, as to their unique and complete essence, they are one, while in the names of the Persons there are three. And then, in order for you to be well informed through all that I previously explained, I intended to demonstrate that in the fullness of the divinity of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit a division or difference of any kind is not admissible.
(De Trinitate Book 1; CCSL 9:19)
Ps.-Athanasius/ps.-Eusebius Vercellensis, De Trinitate I, CCSL 9:19 (cf. PL 62:246):

Porson claims this one (the quotation at the end of the first book) is not in the the old Paris nor Cologne editions. And falsely claims that the shorter reading is much better connected.
Reading the comment above I highlighted this portion: ''And then, in order for you to be well informed through all that I previously explained, I intended to demonstrate that in the fullness of the divinity of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit a division or difference of any kind is not admissible".

In fact there is not a division among the three, but distinctions, they are three distincts Persons; but difference exists because one is the glory of the Father, other the glory of JESUS, and other the glory of the person of holly Spirit. Even JESUS Himself said: My Father is greater than I-John 14:v.28, this assertion of our Lord JESUS reveals a difference between both Father and Son, difference of glory. Regarding the person of the holy Spirit, we cannot confound the Person with the gift of the holy Spirit, for the Person is a God, the God of the earth-Revelation 11:v.4-. First, GOD, the Word, is Spirit-John 4:v.24, GOD is of heaven, JESUS is of heaven, as He said, I came down from heaven (and JESUS has genealogy), not to do mine own will, but the will of Him that sent me- i.e. to do the will of GOD the Father-the Word.
But the person of the holy Spirit came not from heaven, GOD made him BE BORN from the earth like all men, except JESUS who was born here on earth, is Israel, but He came from heaven. The birth of the holy Spirit is a mystery of GOD because the person of the holy Spirit has not genealogy as JESUS has, he has not the same glory of JESUS, oh no, absolutely not. What matters and prevails is what JESUS said: I and my Father are One-John10:v.30, and my Father is greater than I -John 14:v.28 , and about the person of the Holy Spirit, said JESUS- , whom I will send unto you from the Father, said JESUS-JOHN 15:v.26-, even the Spirit of Truth, which proceedes from the Father, he shall testify of me, for he not speaks of himself; but whatsoever he hears, that he speaks: and he will show you things to come(Without JESUS, the person of the Holy Spirit can do nothing). JESUS said: He shall glorify me: for he shall receive of mine(Without JESUS, the person of the Holy Spirit can do nothing), and shall shew it unto you. All things that the Father hath are mine: therefore said I, JESUS, that he -the person of the Holy Spirit- shall take of mine, and shall shew it unto you.

1 John 5:v.7 For there are three that bear record (testify) in heaven (heaven has nothing to do with sky, with the physical space of Universe), the Father -GOD the Father-, the Word -the Word made flesh-JESUS- , and the holy Spirit (who is not a ghost as is written in English language, but a Person): and these three are One-they are of perfect unity. JESUS said: But in the days of the voice of the seventh angel, when he shall begin to sound, the MYSTERY of GOD should be finished, as He hath declared to His servants the prophets.

What does the Word of GOD say?

GOD said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: ... Genesis 1v.26. Why didn't GOD say in a different form, for example: I will make a man in my image, and in my likeness. Yes, why? FIRST because GOD the Father doesn't die, so he would abide alone; SECOND, because by and from GOD Himself in particular or individually could only one man be made, and this One was already made and was in the bosom of GOD the Father-JESUS- being He the brightness of GOD's glory, and the EXPRESS IMAGE of His Person,...According the mind of Christ, Except a corn of wheat fall into the ground and die, it abideth alone: but if it die, it bringeth forth much fruit. So, when GOD the Father was made flesh and take a NAME for Him Himself -JESUS- He, GOD, the Father incarnated, came here on earth for to die, and only then started the process of GOD's creation of man in His own image -the Lord JESUS, the EXPRESS IMAGE OF GOD THE FATHER- , and in His likeness through JESUS. As said JESUS, I and my Father are One-John 10:v.30. But my Father is greater than I-John 14:v.28.

And what about the person of the Holy Spirit, the third person among the three? he is the lesser among the three. GOD the Father and JESUS are of heaven(heaven has nothing to do with sky, the physical space of Universe, but celestial environments created by GOD the Father-Isaiah 40:v.21-22), the person of the holy Spirit is of the earth. As I above said, Without JESUS, the person of the Holy Spirit can do nothing. JESUS said: He shall glorify me: for he shall receive of mine(Without JESUS, the person of the Holy Spirit can do nothing), and shall shew it unto you. All things that the Father hath are mine: therefore said I, JESUS, that he -the person of the Holy Spirit- shall take of mine, and shall shew it unto you.

1 Corinthians 1:v.20 to 31

20 Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world?

21 For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not GOD, it pleased GOD by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.

22 For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom:

23 But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness;

24 But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of GOD, and the wisdom of GOD.

25 Because the foolishness of GOD is wiser than men; and the weakness of GOD is stronger than men.

26 For ye see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called:

27 But GOD hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and GOD hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty;

28 And base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath GOD chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are:

29 That no flesh should glory in his presence.


30 But of him are ye in Christ Jesus, who of GOD is made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption:

31 That, according as it is written, He that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord.
 
Last edited:

Oseas

Member
Genesis 1:v.26-28

26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; MALE and FEMALE created he them. (Today, or in the current time, we can say that in fact GOD created man as a tiny god (small letter), in His own image, in the image of GOD created he him, and through JESUS was created also the woman - the Church (female) and then fulfilled what is written in the verse 28, as follows:
28 And GOD blessed them, and GOD said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that MOVETH upon the earth.

Revelation 11:v.15 to 19

15 And the seventh angel sounded; and there were great voices in heaven, saying, The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ; and he shall reign for ever and ever.

16 And the four and twenty elders, which sat before GOD on their seats, fell upon their faces, and worshipped GOD,

17 Saying, We give thee thanks, O Lord GOD Almighty, which art, and wast, and art to come; because thou hast taken to thee thy great power, and hast reigned.

18 And the nations were angry, and thy WRATH is come(Revelation 6:v.16-17-take a look), and the time of the dead, that they should be Judged(Daniel 7:v.22and 26-27), and that thou shouldest give reward unto thy servants the prophets, and to the saints, and them that fear thy name, small and great; and shouldest destroy them which destroy the earth.

19 And the temple of GOD was opened in heaven(heaven is not sky), and there was seen in his temple the ark of his testament: and there were lightnings, and voices, and thunderings, and an earthquake, and great hail.
 
Top