To refute the incessant Feminist male bashing against Barak that I have always heard, I once left some comments at Dalrock’s site that I will rehash and combine here for you. Or you can go to the link below, hit Control-F and type “Sharkly” into the little find-pop-up-window to locate and read them all there.

https://dalrock.wordpress.com/2018/06/06/it-would-be-unchivalrous-to-tell-her-no/#comment-275529

BillyS says: He was a wimpy military leader. Note that he didn’t dispute what she said, but was too afraid to go alone.

Judges 4:8 Barak said to her, “If you will go with me, I will go, but if you will not go with me, I will not go.”

I have a different theory. I think he was wisely testing her to see if he was being tricked and was being sent to his death, or if she really was being truthful about victory, to the point that she would go herself. Unlike in a contemporary Hollywood movie, Barak’s army didn’t need a lone kick-ass woman’s help to fight off the army of Sisera.

I’ve had a similar situation before. After I dismantled, repaired, and reassembled a business jet the test pilot asked me to go along and assist with in-flight tests on the initial test flight. Sometimes in a situation like that there would only be the required pilots on the initial test flight. When I asked why I was necessary on the initial flight, the test pilot confided to me that he would not fly the plane unless he knew I was confident enough in my own work, and the work of the other people I oversaw, to be onboard myself. So I had the opportunity to literally stand behind my work, and perform the cabin pressurization/outflow valve and oxygen system tests on the initial test flight while the pilots were strapped in up front. The pilot was not afraid to fly the airplane, so long as I was not afraid to be onboard.

BillyS says: You can have whatever theory you want, but the text clearly implies he was a wimp. (His glory for winning would go to a woman is what is written.) I think I will stick with the plain meaning rather than forcing my preconceptions on what is written.

I said my idea was a theory. You said he was a wimp, and “was too afraid to go alone.”

I wasn’t forcing anything into the Bible. However you are forcing your feminist stereotype that women are brave and men are cowards, into the Bible. Nowhere does the Bible say that Barak was a coward, or afraid. You see a clear implication where I don’t. I see a man who rose to be the leader of an army that fought in hand to hand combat. That usually doesn’t happen to a coward, anymore than a cowardly man would one day wake up to find himself working as a test pilot. I read my Bible and find Barak given as an example of faith, not as an object of Feminist ridicule.

Hebrews 11:29 By faith the people crossed the Red Sea as on dry land, but the Egyptians, when they attempted to do the same, were drowned. 30 By faith the walls of Jericho fell down after they had been encircled for seven days. 31 By faith Rahab the prostitute did not perish with those who were disobedient, because she had given a friendly welcome to the spies. 32 And what more shall I say? For time would fail me to tell of Gideon, Barak, Samson, Jephthah, of David and Samuel and the prophets— 33 who through faith conquered kingdoms, enforced justice, obtained promises, stopped the mouths of lions, 34 quenched the power of fire, escaped the edge of the sword, were made strong out of weakness, became mighty in war, put foreign armies to flight.

1 Samuel 12:10 And they cried out to the Lord and said, ‘We have sinned, because we have forsaken the Lord and have served the Baals and the Ashtaroth. But now deliver us out of the hand of our enemies, that we may serve you.’ 11 And the Lord sent Jerubbaal and Barak and Jephthah and Samuel and delivered you out of the hand of your enemies on every side, and you lived in safety.

No mention of Jael or Deborah in those verses. The glory may have gone to a woman, but God gives Barak due credit for his faith, and never calls him a wimp. Just the Feminist preachers I’ve heard my whole life call him that. I think he was just being a wise leader, protecting his men’s lives, by making sure the woman was telling him the whole truth, and not working for the enemy, by seeing if she would come along, thereby backing up her words with her life.

Judges 4:16 And Barak pursued the chariots and the army to Harosheth-hagoyim, and all the army of Sisera fell by the edge of the sword; not a man was left.

Chasing down and slaughtering better equipped foes does not sound like the act of a coward to me.

Judges 5:15a the princes of Issachar came with Deborah, and Issachar faithful to Barak; into the valley they rushed at his heels.

That verse implies Barak was able to inspire faithfulness in his men, and even led the charge! With the others rushing at his heels. I won’t listen to a keyboard warrior call this heroic man of faith a wimp, just because it pleases the Feminists to emasculate all our male heroes.

Barak was in fact protecting the women of Israel, not the other way around.

Judges 5:28 “Out of the window she peered,
the mother of Sisera wailed through the lattice:
‘Why is his chariot so long in coming?
Why tarry the hoofbeats of his chariots?’
29 Her wisest princesses answer,
indeed, she answers herself,
30 ‘Have they not found and divided the spoil?—
A womb or two for every man;
spoil of dyed materials for Sisera,
spoil of dyed materials embroidered,
two pieces of dyed work embroidered for the neck as spoil?’

If Barak had not been faithful and led the charge against Sisera, more than likely the women of Israel would have been raped, but the Feminists’ inclination is to make a wimp out of him despite his demonstrated valor that undoubtedly saved many women from rape and other ravages of war.

I don’t fault you for your view. It was what I was always taught. But after the Red Pill, I see things differently, and I now know not to believe a word those hirelings told me. Watch out for those who emasculate the men of the Bible, always double check that sort of stuff, and then triple check it.

I was not familiar with the story either except from Feminist hirelings telling me that a wimpy man was afraid to go into battle without a brave woman leader to lead the scared man-child to the battle.
So I went to my handy tool:
https://classic.biblegateway.com/quicksearch/?quicksearch=Barak&qs_version=ESV
And found out that Barak was only mentioned in Judges 4-5, 1 Samuel 12, and Hebrews 11. Then I read those passages and saw the whole story.

I had always sensed as a child that there was something repellant and off about the feminist version of the story that the hirelings preached. They seemed gleeful to spin this narrative of a cowardly general needing to be reprimanded and babysat by an empowered lady Judge. And I felt they often went overboard in their gratuitous pandering to the womenfolk, while making me hot under the collar that they were bashing males and claiming crap like “the average mom is braver than a General, that’s why God doesn’t have men give birth, because they’re not up to the task”. Even as a child I sensed that snake was up there blowing sunshine up the ladies dresses, and doing it at my expense. The Bible said Barak told Deborah “If you will go with me, I will go, but if you will not go with me, I will not go.” The story didn’t go on for half an hour running down men and claiming women are superior like the Feminist pulpiteer did. The concept of a frightened General seemed phony. And if he was so scared at the head of an army of 10,000 armed men, how in the heck was one lady coming along going to make him feel so much safer. The story never made sense and I hated it, and how it was used in churches to make fools of all men.

But after I just read the whole story myself, I realized Barak was most likely testing Deborah. He didn’t need her to come along. He just wanted to be positive that she wasn’t afraid to come along herself, because, if she was afraid, then he would know he and his army were being set up, and Deborah would not want to be killed by them when they found that out. False prophets were to be put to death, and Deborah was a prophetess. If she really believed God had promised them a victory, she would not be afraid to go along and be there to watch from behind Israel’s lines.

Is courage important?

Barak was given as an example of Faith in Hebrews 11:29-34. And Faith is the source of most courage.

“Captain, my religious belief teaches me to feel as safe in battle as in bed. God has fixed the time for my death. I do not concern myself about that, but to be always ready, no matter when it may overtake me.” He added, after a pause, looking me full in the face: “That is the way all men should live, and then all would be equally brave.” ~ Stonewall Jackson

Men of God are not to be cowards, and cowards can only pretend to be Godly when they’re not scared out of it.

Matthew 10:28 And do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather fear Him who can destroy both soul and body in hell.

Courage is not simply one of the virtues, but the form of every virtue at the testing point. ~ C.S. Lewis

Courage is the first of human qualities because it is the quality which guarantees all others. ~ Winston Churchill

Few women are very courageous today, and that is why their virtue is so easily abandoned in any situation. Because of a lack of courage peoples “fixed morals” collapse into “situational ethics”. The less courage a person has, the less influence it will take to get them to abandon their morals.

My theory is; if you were to have a person honestly rate the importance to them of each of their moral beliefs on a scale of 1 to 10, and then you were to rate their courage accurately on a scale of 1 to 10 you could multiply those two numbers together and get a 1-100 number representing how hard it would likely be, percentage wise, to get that person to violate that particular moral belief, or how likely they are to keep true to their conviction at different levels of pressure or temptation.
Wouldn’t it be nice to have a printout before you “Man-up” and marry that whore. She won’t fool around on you with a 7 or an 8, but 9’s and 10’s are beyond her resistance level, so don’t leave her alone with Chad, but it is fine to let her visit with Melvin. That kind of thing would be handy to have computed. If I put more pressure on her than X amount, she will begin to lie to me. Maybe somebody needs to make a formula workbook if somebody hasn’t already.

Anyhow, hirelings preach about Barak and Deborah wrongly because they lack the courage to stand up for men against this world’s Feminism. The church is led by cowards who will lapse on their less valued morals in secret at the least temptation or pressure, and their most firmly held beliefs are even up for grabs with enough temptation or pressure. I wouldn’t mind if our church leaders had feet of clay, but they’ve got brains of clay and hearts of clay also. So they are never any good, even before they fall. Folks, you have to just read the Bible for yourselves! These hirelings can’t be trusted with eternal matters. Also be of good courage! And be a good example of courage for your kids, and teach them to be courageous so that they can stand up against the world and be a pure light in the darkness. Keep the faith.

In Giotto’s c.1305AD Gothic/Proto-Renaissance fresco, shown above, Jesus Christ is illustrated clearing the merchants out of the temple while His haloed disciples watch and the religious leaders murmur against Him.

The merchants in the temple had turned the house of God into a den of thieves, but they could only have done this with the consent of their religious leaders. The Romans crucified Jesus, but He was turned over to the Romans, to be crucified, by the High Priest of his own people. Pontius Pilate asked Jesus (in John 19:10-11) “You do not speak to me? Do You not know that I have authority to release You, and I have authority to crucify You?” Jesus answered, “You would have no authority over Me, unless it had been given you from above; for this reason he who delivered Me to you has the greater sin.”

So who did Jesus Christ argue with and rail against the most, the whores, the tax collectors, thieves, murderers, who? We all know it was the Jewish religious leaders of that day that Jesus gave most of His condemnation. Jesus was God’s “King of the Jews”, but His own religion’s leaders received him not. They didn’t like His words, they didn’t like His ways.

The replica sign shown above reads, “Jesus [of] Nazareth King [of the] Jews”.

Jesus Christ’s chief human enemies were the apostate religious leaders of His own religion. But weren’t they Jewish in religion and following God’s laws? Mostly, maybe 80-90%, but they believed enough false doctrine and traditions of men to mistake their own miracle working Messiah for a blasphemer. Was it an honest mistake? No, they had motive. They didn’t want Jesus busting up their sacrifice selling cartel, questioning their traditions, proving He had God’s power to heal on the Sabbath, and teaching the people contrary to their doctrines, based upon the holy Scriptures. Jesus was correcting their wicked ways and they wanted Him dead, all the while they claimed to be looking forward to the Messiah coming to rule over them. But, He had come and the religious leaders didn’t want Him as ruler over them.

So how is this relevant to us today?

Well, as they say, “History repeats”. Ecclesiastes 3:15(NLT) What is happening now has happened before, and what will happen in the future has happened before, because God makes the same things happen over and over again.

So will Christ allow the leaders of His “new” religion to again leave the truth of His word, and begin teaching doctrines they evolved to excuse their own waywardness? Is the same King of the Jews who let the Jews become idolatrous and apostate and reject His ways, now as King of the Christians going to allow the church to become idolatrous and apostate and reject His ways? Surely, you can’t be serious?Deuteronomy 32:18 You ignored the Rock who fathered you and forgot the God who gave you life. Some translations do say “gave you birth”, but none use the pronoun “she”. This retarded woman-worshiper has forgotten our eternal Father and is demoting God’s sex to suit his idolatrous Feminist beliefs.

Jeremiah 44:15-17a Then all the men which knew that their wives had burned incense unto other gods, and all the women that stood by, a great multitude, even all the people that dwelt in the land of Egypt, in Pathros, answered Jeremiah, saying, 16 As for the word that thou hast spoken unto us in the name of the Lord, we will not hearken unto thee. 17 But we will certainly do whatsoever thing goeth forth out of our own mouth, to burn incense unto the queen of heaven, and to pour out drink offerings unto her, as we have done, we, and our fathers, our kings, and our princes, in the cities of Judah, and in the streets of Jerusalem.

So, could “Christian” churches again ignore Father God’s word and turn to giving idolatrous worth-ship to things feminine? The following verse is soon about to happen:

Daniel 12:1(ICB) Daniel, at that time Michael, the great prince, will stand up. (He is the one who protects your people.) There will be a time of much trouble. It will be the worst time since nations have been on earth. But your people will be saved. Everyone whose name is written in God’s book will be saved.

The word “trouble” is listed in Strong’s Hebrew dictionary as word 6869 צָרָה Pronounced: (tsaw-raw’) a feminine noun that literally means: vexer, rival-wife, a female rival or adversary, and yet it also means trouble in a figurative sense. That Hebrew word has a more frequently used masculine version, but God said the less used feminine noun, perhaps to indicate the feminine vexing rivalry that is to be in that time of tribulation. Some feel that this was God’s way of warning us approximately 2,560 years ago, of the coming tribulation that is marked by the satanic evil of Feminism. Where God’s righteous patriarchal order has been completely thrown off and a defiling female-supremacist rival order, or Feminism, afflicts the sons of God’s people. I surely know Feminism has enabled the destruction of my family and now has my sons living without a father. However it is comforting to know that God not only foresaw this Feminist trouble, but that he warned us it would come upon us, before His deliverance of His people. God knows our “trouble”. Commenter Feeriker once wrote:

Whenever I learn a new Hebrew word, the first thing I instinctively do is look to see if it is a cognate to Arabic.

This one definitely is. The Arabic word is. ثورة (“Thow’-rah” in classical standard Arabic, or sometimes pronounced “Sow’-rah”, or “Tow”-rah” in regional dialects such as Egyptian or Levantine).

The Arabs use it to mean “revolution” or “uprising,” a more powerful form of “trouble” or “disturbance,” which is DEFINITELY relevant to this topic.

Feeriker makes a good point. This female “uprising” or sexual “revolution” was long foretold as afflicting the sons of God’s people at the end of the age. We can rest assured that God has this world under His watchful eye, and foreknew our Feminist trouble from the beginning. And we who fight it, are fighting on God’s side, against the adversary of God. So be of good courage!

1 Corinthians 11:7 For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man.

So who are God’s worst human enemies today?

God’s chief enemies are again now our “Christian” spiritual leaders. Like the Spiritual leaders at Christ’s first coming they have turned their worship centers into profit centers. While they preach 80-90% of God’s word, they still join the Serpent in leading women into rebellion (“Ye shall be like God”) falsely claiming that women also image God the Father & Son, and were therefore created equal to men, thereby making marriage into a form of slavery where a man forces his equal into an unequal relationship as his helper. They preach the exact same doctrine as anti-Christian Feminists, telling women to seek equality with, and to usurp, the image of God and telling men to hearken to the voice of the woman. They’re replaying the role of the Serpent from Genesis 3. They do the works of their father the devil.

Basically all of satanic Feminism was empowered by state sponsored church leaders in Rome declaring females to be in the image of God beginning around the end of the fourth century AD to allow Mary to be made co-equal with Christ and into a replacement goddess to offer to forcibly converted goddess worshippers. Over a millennium later the Protestant reformation finally rolled back the deity of Mary, “the queen of heaven”, but today we still need reformers to roll back the image of God from off of women, so that wives can again rightfully and joyfully follow their clear superior, knowing that their husband is the image of the Lord Christ, the Good Shepherd, while wives don’t image God, but instead they image the ever straying church.

To restore God’s holy patriarchy we need to restore the fitting natural disparity between the sexes by reverencing exclusively fathers and sons as the image and glory of God the Father & Son. By teaching men and women their correct respective standing and rank before God, men’s royal priesthood over their families can be restored, and marriage may again become a holy union operating according to God’s design.

Obviously laws and precedents would have to be reset, and governance returned to men, but the process of correct restoration of holy patriarchal governance begins with first understanding who God is, who we are, and how we all relate to God via His hierarchy. (1 Corinthians 11:3)

To make ready the way for Christ we must contradict the Feminist religious leaders of our day, who are Christ’s chief human enemies, and share the beautiful truth about our masculine God’s holy patriarchal kingdom where the Father, who is LORD of all spirits and all flesh, transfers all dominion to the Son. So we as the images of God should seek to imitate God and transfer all of our society’s dominion into the hands of our sons, not leaving behind a society that is satanic, Feminist, and dysfunctional. Amen!

Brace yourselves men. Atheists are now in control of what our nation’s pastors preach. Why? Because we let women rule over us. The following link leads to a story about a pastor who got “Canceled” for advising women to endeavor to stay visually attractive for their husbands to bolster their marriages. This pastor’s sermon was first pointed out and shrieked at by “Friendly Atheist” over at Patheos. Later it was blasted by butch haired Reagan Williams who tells us that not only is Pastor Stewart-Allen Clark “toxic” to women, “he’s apparently extremely homophobic and transphobic too.”

After these unsaved women began to publicly cunt-out over Pastor Clark’s practical sex-appeal sermon for women, then some of the woke media was also fed the story and blared it too. As a result First General Baptist Church of Malden, Missouri now claims: “As of March 2, 2021, Pastor Stewart-Allen Clark has taken a leave of absence and is seeking professional counseling.”

Sent to the reeducation camp! So what horribly “toxic” things did this pastor say to incite his woke lynching? Well, I listened to his sermon, and I personally was not offended by any of it. Although he did spout the tiring & ungodly feminist fantasy of “perpetual courtship”, saying; “The chase ain’t ever over.” But, I presume it wasn’t so much what he said, as how he said it. Lots of quips holding women accountable for maintaining their beauty with very little gynogroveling or the profuse apologies that might ordinarily accompany even one such suggestion that women try improving themselves. Furthermore pastor Clark has grown fat and his delivery was a little awkward. So, much like how some people can’t “pull off” certain fashions, Pastor Clark was deemed by the woke trolls to be too fat and dorky to be telling wives to keep themselves beautiful for husbands like himself. He was deemed unworthy to speak in such a way to wives. They esteem themselves to have the worth-ship to be above any man’s correction, and certainly above an obese man’s correction.

Now if Pastor Clark had been a hawt panty-dropper with a way-cool delivery, he may have made many of these frigid harpies moist in the panties with his androcentric banter, and still be leading his church. But, via many comments I read, I believe his biggest perceived “crime” was being fat himself, while instructing women not to be.

Pastor Clark also used Melania Trump as an example of a trophy wife who keeps herself attractive for her husband.

Liberal heads exploding in …3…2…1… BOOM!

Which would be your first lady?

Pastor Clark also said: “This is just the way God made us. Men have to have sexual intimacy or they’re not happy. It’s just the way it is.” Presumably there are a few men with the “gift of celibacy”, but otherwise I’d have to agree. Clearly my evil wife wasted our entire marriage intentionally trying to keep me unhappy.

So where does this Feminist equality nonsense always derive itself from?

First General Baptist is a church in the General Baptist denomination, which released a statement Monday saying Clark’s sermon was “not consistent with the positions and values” of the organization. “General Baptists believe that every woman was created in the image of God, and they should be valued for that reason,”…

The Image of God, men’s divine birthright, is falsely claimed by women and fraudulently touted to make them equal to fathers and sons who truly image God the Father and the Son. And then, next thing you know, women are not only deemed equal to men, but women are treated like they are “more equal” than men. And so men are not permitted to correct women. But God never ever said women were made in His matchless image, like He so many times said men are. And God, who chose to make two sexes, always clearly identifies Himself as the male sex. And furthermore the Bible explains that women are a “weaker vessel”. Not a strong vessel intended to carry the matchless image of God. Instead of imaging God, women professing godliness are to be shamefaced and always in subjection.

1 Corinthians 11:7 For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man.

Recently I read an article at Answers in Genesis regarding; “ Does God Have a Gender?“. The author makes the point that: “God could have created a world in which there were no gender distinctions … Thus, in creating gender and then representing himself consistently and repeatedly as male, God is making a deliberate assertion about his nature. There is something particular about maleness that he chooses to represent his nature in a way that femaleness does not.”

Another author at the same site discusses: “Is God Male or Female?”. That author begins by pandering to this world’s Feminists by issuing the following disclaimer: “Before we go on, it is important to note that this question is not about the equality of men and women. Both are made in God’s image and are therefore equal (Genesis 1:27). Rather, it is about who gets to decide how we speak about God and how we address him in prayer: people or God?”

(Previously I have delved into what Genesis 1:27 actually says regarding who is the image of God, here, and also here, as well as in other posts.)

He is partly right, in that, if men and women were both the matchless image of God most high, then they would truly be equal. Because no image could be greater than being the image of God.

As an example: If I and my old college roommate, who both got the same degree from the same university, were to debate about who had achieved the higher ranking degree, and I started going on about how I had attended a better elementary school, everybody would realize that what elementary school I had gone to was a moot point, because our ultimate degree ranking is based upon our highest degree, it is not determined by something of lesser degree.

And so it is true, that if both male and female were designed to image the eternal Father and Son, then by definition men and women must be equal, by nature of sharing that same highest aspect of their created identity and personage. That assumed equality, in God’s image, is the bedrock foundation upon which all Feminism was built.

But of course, like the Bible and the earliest church father’s writings all unanimously attest, women don’t image our Father & Son Godhead, like men do:

1 Corinthians 11:7 For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man.

Ambrosiaster wrote: “Paul says that the honor and dignity of a man makes it wrong for him to cover his head, because the image of God should not be hidden. Indeed, it ought not to be hidden, for the glory of God is seen in the man. … A woman therefore ought to cover her head, because she is not the likeness of God but is under subjection.”

So the point of application is that Feminism then is exposed as a fundamentally false teaching based upon a falsely presumed equality. While the one sex that truly images God, men, are shown to be superior, and thus rightful heads. It is in the best interest of every man, woman, and child that men be given the patriarchal authority that God ordained for them to have over their wives and children.

Although women are a weaker vessel (1 Peter 3:7) not designed to carry the matchless image of God the Father and His Son, it is not an individual woman or man’s relative strengths and weaknesses that determines men’s superiority, but it is the image of God that was categorically bestowed on men, that makes all men superior in earthly rank to women within God’s holy patriarchal kingdom. A woman can’t become the stronger vessel by steroids or education, those things won’t make her outrank a man who was made in the image of God. Even if she is physically stronger, and mentally stronger, she is still a woman who, if she professes godliness, should adorn herself with shamefacedness (1 timothy 2:9-10) while reverencing her husband. (Ephesians 5:33)

Feminism teaches that traditional patriarchal marriage as set up by God is a form of slavery where one equal subjects another equal into an unequal relationship where he rules over her. If you accept men and women to be equals, then marriage automatically becomes unjust and also unworkable, since you can’t have a democracy of two people. However, if God created man first in His own image, and to be His own glory, and later created Eve for Adam to be his helper and to be Adam’s glory, then it is only fitting that she should submit to her superior, as the Bible explains: Colossians 3:18 Wives, be subject to your husbands, as is fitting in the Lord.

Marriage is not slavery, just as parenting is not enslaving children. Because children are admittedly inferior and need parental guidance, it is only fitting that they be taught to submit to their parents’ control.

If men were truly created first, preeminent, and superior to women, and women, who being the last creature created, were the first creature to transgress against God; then patriarchy isn’t enslavement, but instead is the loving gift of our all-wise God. Through patriarchy, God wants to keep society as righteous as can be expected by governing sinful and silly women with sinful yet more dutiful and dutybound men, who were created to serve God directly, while their wives were vessels created to serve God through serving God’s image, their fathers and then husbands.

Once you understand that females are neither the image nor likeness of the Father or Son, then women no longer have a basis to claim equality with men who are to be reverenced in marriage as the images of Jesus Christ,(God) while the wife images the church.(not God)

Ephesians 5:33 Nevertheless let every one of you in particular so love his wife even as himself; and the wife see that she reverence her husband.

So, I exhort you men, use the Word of God to pull down the stronghold of Feminism, by first destroying its foundation, women’s claim to image our masculine God. If we don’t pull out Feminism’s root the noxious weed of sexual equality will grow right back in churches whereby satanic Feminism was first cultivated into our culture, ultimately destroying our culture.

Some time around 400AD women began to be claimed to also be the likeness of God, so that Mary then could become a deity and be worshipped as a substitute goddess by goddess worshippers whom Rome had forcibly converted to their new state religion of “Christianity”. And how could Mary have been made divine if she wasn’t allowed to even be an image or likeness of God? That had to be changed. The protestant reformation, a millennium later, rolled back the deity of Mary. But, now we need to roll back the image of the Father and Son from off of usurping women to rest just on fathers and sons. Feminism has now grown so wretched that women murder men’s children while still in their own wombs, destroy marriages for no fault, and get to kidnap fathers’ children by default. Our society can’t survive much more of this satanic arrogance against God and His holy patriarchy.

2 Corinthians 10:4 For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God for the pulling down of strongholds, 5 casting down imaginations and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ, 6 and being in readiness to avenge all disobedience when your obedience is fulfilled.

The picture above is a colorized portrait of my father. He has been dead for a dozen years, but as I write this it chokes me up to see my father looking back at me again. He was my protector. While the rest of my family often mistreated me, when dad was home I was safe and he made sure I was treated fairly. My father was a stalwart man of principle, a genius engineer, and a servant of God. He was a formidable man who could bring gravitas to any discussion, but he could also tell hilarious jokes for two hours straight after all the serious matters had been taken care of.

My father showed me how to be a man, by being masculine for our entire life together. His Biblical frame of reference did not bend to accommodate the world, the world had to adapt itself to my father. He never cared about fame , he had no love of money, and he wasn’t afraid to die, so the world lacked much leverage against my dad. Life with dad was an adventure, a mission, a test, and I never doubted for a moment that dad would see to it that we achieved his mission, no matter the circumstances.

I wish every boy could grow up with a father like mine. Because then there would be no questions about how to be masculine, nobody undisciplined, and no man without a mission. It breaks my heart that so many boys are now growing up without fathers, including my own sons. What they miss out on by not having a father in their life is incalculable. You need a solid man to raise up solid men. Boys can’t learn how to be a man by watching their mother.

Well, 2020, (the worst year evah!) is now thankfully behind us.

The sun has set on that year of turmoil.

Will we watch the birth of a new year of God’s great blessings on these our faithless lands?

Well, I don’t claim any inspiration for the following predictions, nor am I a prognosticator, but I think things will get tougher for those who truly seek to serve God, and probably for everybody else as well.

Unless President Trump does something drastic within the next few weeks, we will be looking at a new administration that does not have America’s best interest in mind. However, our leftist media, which has been religiously preaching doom and gloom for four years straight, will usher in a new era of gilded-turds. “Everything is Awesome!” will become their new mantra. We will be told that everything is getting better. However, since our adversaries “Never let a good crisis go to waste” we can be sure that some crises will arise to justify their taking away more of our freedoms, presumably for our own good.

Now if Donald Trump does decide to, and successfully unleashes a battle to claim the presidency, that all honest-minded folks know he won, then there will be mayhem, and more years of liberal screeching like nothing we’ve ever witnessed before. Donald Trump does not get the gilded-turd treatment from our treasonous media. On the contrary, if he remains, the media will do everything within their power to foment discontentment with absolutely everything that can possibly be linked to his reign.

Either way things don’t look rosy. Either we’re ruled by crooks and we will be told that we’re doing great while they rob our children’s future to feed their hedonism today. Or there will be riotous opposition to Making America Great Again. A large part of the country will be trying to bring down our republic from within. And that is all without even considering the possibility of acts of God.

My Prediction

Pain!

Please leave your thoughts or predictions below:

A commenter, “thedeti”, left a great comment at Σ Frame describing the Feminist life script for women. Responding to the following question: One question I have at this point is, why are a woman’s solipsistic dreams so much more important than submitting to a fantastic man who loves her? Not even sexual bonding is enough to get her to tune into her God ordained purpose as a woman? WTH??? And no matter how good her life might be, fantasy land will always be “better”.

Elspeth is correct that it is the parents’ fault. It’s also the ambient feminism that everyone swims in. Modern Western culture IS feminism. Everyone and everything is feminist. Even Christian women are feminists who are against abortion.

All women, and I mean ALL women, born after about 1960 are marinated in feminism and are feminists. All women in the US over the age of 25 are feminists, and I don’t care what anyone says to the contrary because it’s not true. EVERY man who has gotten married in the last 40 years married a feminist.

The last reason is the overarching dominant cultural narrative and “life script” that Novaseeker has explicated so well and better than I can. The narrative is basically this:

“Daughter, you can’t ever depend on a man and you can’t ever trust a man. Think about the D’s: Divorce, death, disability. What if he leaves you, cheats on you, dies on you, or becomes a cripple? You need a career so you can stand on your own two feet if you have to. You need college. You need job training. You need to earn your own money. You need to compete on equal footing with men. You are equal to men in every way, you can do anything a man can do. You don’t have to take any crap from a man and you sure as hell don’t have to “submit” to him. Any man you marry will be a completely 50/50 equal partner with you and you MUST insist on that.”

“In the meantime before you get married, it’s not really OK to have sex, but you’re going to anyway, so just make sure that if you do, you do it with men you love or at least like a lot. Or, if you’re a non-Christian, you can have all the sex you want with as many different men as you want and there will still be hot, attractive, resources-rich men waiting for you when you’re done with that.”

The ideal “life script” is:

Education, bachelor’s degree or extensive job training, move to a population center, get job, live alone or with roommates who are doing the same thing you’re doing. Advance in career, get competent or even proficient. Travel to fun and exotic tropical destinations. Have fun. Make some frivolous purchases like $800 Louis Vuitton handbags. Keep working. Probably get master’s degree. Change job if necessary. All your friends and every woman you know around your age is doing this.

During all of the above, you are dating both for fun and in the hopes of meeting a marriageable man. You are having sex with most of those men. Some are false starts. Some are short term, no more than 3-6 months. Some are long term. Again: All your friends and every woman you know around your age is doing this.

The above 2 paragraphs take her out to at least age 25, and many times to the late 20s. (It is alleged by some that many, most, women meet the man they will marry by age 23, and they then marry in their late 20s because the reported average age from relationship start to marriage is 4.9 years. This doesn’t take into account though that female average age at first marriage is 28 and creeping upwards.)

Phase 2: Meet man who you will marry. Get married in equal partnership marriage. Have one child, at most two. Options to stay home, work part time/flex time, or continue full time. Your husband also works and does significant chores around the house and takes the stress off you, as he’s expected to because you are his equal in every significant way. It’s not your job to do most of the housework and child rearing- you’re to do only half of it, and he’s to do the other half (that you decide he needs to do).

So that’s why a woman’s solipsistic dreams are more important than submitting to a fantastic man who loves her:

1) Her “dreams” (or, her life survival) predominate over marriage and everything else until she’s at least in her early 20s. During the time when she’s most attractive and most able to secure “a fantastic man who loves her”, she is spending that time getting educated and job trained so she can do what mom and dad and everyone else told her – Don’t ever be in a position where you have to depend on a man. Instead of looking for a man to take care of survival, she’s doing it herself and not nearly as well as a man can.

2) She’s entitled to “have fun” before she gets married. Travel, make and spend money. Date (i.e. have sex with) attractive men and maybe one will commit. Dating = sex. Everyone is doing this. Your parents, church and pastors usually know this but look the other way.

3) The way you find a husband is you find attractive men, have sex with them within 3 dates, and then find out if there’s enough compatibility there to keep dating. Then hopefully you get exclusive. Then hopefully, when everything is right, you get married. But EVERYTHING must be in place: His career, her career, sufficient money, a decent place to live, access to transportation and culture. She must also be satisfied she has acquired enough life experience that she is satisfying her YOLO needs and FOMO fears, and she must do this before she agrees to marriage.

4) Submission is almost completely omitted from the narrative. Women are not to submit to men. A woman dating a man is not to take the submissive position. A wife is not to submit to her husband, or if she does, she submits only when she wants to and only when she approves of the husband’s conduct. She has everyone’s permission and approval to approach men and marriage this way – even from her church and her pastors, and certainly from her mother, and almost always from her father (if she has one) Absolutely no one will tell her she is to submit to her husband “in all things, as unto the Lord” – not even her church, not even her pastors. Submission to a man equals dependence on him, and remember – she cannot be in a position where she has to depend on a man.

So how can this paradigm be fixed?

previously I gave some advice about keeping an unmarried woman in her father’s house. But, I really would like your help in coming up with a way to counter this godless Feminist life script. Some of the underlying assumptions made by those who accept this life script seem to be that:

1. An olden day patriarchal lifestyle and marriage is unacceptable for their daughter.
2. If I live a strict Bible-directed life, I will miss out on so much I would like to do.
3. As long as I’m not the worst girl at church (e.g. the pastor’s daughter) I’m still going to heaven.
4. I can be redeemed and a fornicator.
5. God must judge me relative to the society all around me.
6. Egalitarian/Complementarian marriages work better and are happier than Patriarchal marriages.
7. My husband doesn’t deserve my best years, or for my life to focus on him.
8. I can chase my Feminist dreams before and after marriage, and if I can, I’ll help my husband too.
9. As a woman my goals and dreams are just as important as any man’s.
10. My husband should do half of the domestic work, because; “Baby, I’m worth it!”

Should we do something about it?

If we only keep the brainwashed young men and women of this Feminist generation in our thoughts and prayers, things will only grow worse as the rabid Feminists charge unopposed against the last few remnants of traditional Christian patriarchy that are still left in our lives. At this moment what I can see is that we need to change our mindset and the frame of reference of those around us. Feminism and Hollywood have programmed and brainwashed us to believe that women are equal to men, if not morally superior. So consequently a wife’s priorities become equal to her husband’s, if not superior.

Many of the underlying assumptions that the Feminist life script is based upon, are rooted in the idea that husbands aren’t any more important than their wives. Churchians generally believe that now, and that male headship makes little sense, but is commanded only by reason of divine fiat. So, they try to humor God by calling the man the head, while carrying on like he is only the co-head, or preferably only the vice president of their daughter’s future extension of their own family. They don’t give their daughters away to belong to their husband’s clan anymore, on the contrary they feel that the husbands are being nabbed for their daughter’s matriarchal dominion.

Basically people lack the faith that God’s original ways are best, that their daughters should prepare for a faith-filled life depending on God and their husband. They would gladly risk their daughter fornicating and being indoctrinated and radicalized into complete worldliness just to give her a chance to get a degree at a well known school of this world. They make a deal with the devil whereby they clearly sell out their future son in law’s best interests to try to assure that their daughter tastes fleeting pleasures apart from him while securing her financial insurance against ever becoming fully bound to his circumstances or dependent on him. They are literally trading off future marital unity interdependence and intimacy for faithless independence and separation preparedness. We as individuals and as a society need to repent of this foolish faithlessness!

Exit Question: How do we best get people to deprioritize women and their fruitless independence and instead cherish men, marriage, and strong patriarchal families?

Feminists say that us men all want women barefoot pregnant and in the kitchen. Well, they’re wrong. I’m not opposed to footwear. LOL

I’d like to share with you some concepts that can recalibrate your thinking about women. The primary concept is that all actions to “advance” women from out of their God given and natural role of wife and mother, are contrary to God and contrary to what is best for society.

God intends natural unions and divisions among people.

After a failed experiment with communism William Bradford wrote in his Journal of Plymouth Plantation about the communal living: The experience that was had in this common course and condition, tried sundry years, and that amongst godly and sober men, may well evince the vanity of that conceit of Plato’s & other ancients, applauded by some of later times;—that the taking away of property, and bringing in community into a common wealth, would make them happy and flourishing; as if they were wiser than God. For this community (so far as it was) was found to breed much confusion & discontent, and retard much employment that would have been to their benefit and comfort. For the young-men that were most able and fit for labor & service did repine that they should spend their time & strength to work for other men’s wives and children, without any recompense. The strong, or man of parts, had no more in division of victuals & clothes, than he that was weak and not able to do a quarter the other could; this was thought injustice. The aged and graver men to be ranked and equalized in labors, and victuals, clothes, & Etc., with the meaner & younger sort, thought it some indignity & disrespect unto them. And for men’s wives to be commanded to do service for other men, as dressing their meat, washing their clothes, & Etc., they deemed it a kind of slavery, neither could many husbands well brook it. Upon the point all beginning to have alike, and all to do alike, they thought themselves in the like condition, and one as good as another; and so, if it did not cut off those relations that God hath set amongst men, yet it did at least much diminish and take of the mutual respects that should be preserved amongst them.

Part of what Governor Bradford was saying was that there are natural distinctions that God makes amongst mankind that need to be kept in place to maintain the mutual respect everybody’s position is due.

Distinctions among people form the basis of what respects they are due.

1 Peter 3:6 It was thus that Sarah obeyed Abraham [following his guidance and acknowledging his headship over her by] calling him lord (master, leader, authority). And you are now her true daughters if you do right and let nothing terrify you [not giving way to hysterical fears or letting anxieties unnerve you]. 7 Likewise ye husbands, dwell with them as men of knowledge, giving honor unto the woman, as unto the weaker vessel, even as they which are heirs together of the grace of life, that your prayers be not interrupted.

The apostle Peter also clearly tells us about mutual due respects. He says that women are weaker vessels, right after speaking of their propensity towards hysterical fears and anxieties, yet women have also been given the grace of life and are due to be honored as wives, even though the husband is lord over her. The wife is not to be scorned even though she is known to be weaker and unequal in her created being, because even as God made her a weaker creature, yet God Himself has made it so that she shares in the same saving grace that God gives to husbands, and so she should also receive some honor due as a recipient together of that grace of eternal life. Clearly the Husband is the greater, the lord, and due greater respect, but the point is that neither of them is due contempt, but both are due respect in keeping with God’s order.

What is God’s order?

God created the man(Adam) first, and gave Adam dominion over all the earth. Then God created Eve secondly, and for Adam, to help him and to be a mate to Adam, and so that he might be fruitful and multiply. After they both had sinned, God again made it clear that Adam should rule over Eve, who had tempted him into defiling himself, after she had first defiled herself. The earth was cursed making Adam’s job of providing their “bread” harder. Adam was to be the breadwinner who provided the sustenance for his family.

Women are defilers.

Revelation 14:4 These are the ones who have not defiled themselves with women, for they are virgins. These are the ones who follow the Lamb wherever he goes. These were redeemed from humanity as firstfruits to God and to the Lamb.

So not only was Eve the defiler of the very first man in Genesis, but all the way forward into the future, as recorded in Revelation, women are so defiling of men, that even in heaven, virgin men are honored by God among His holy saints.

Wives owe their husbands reverence.

When a female former fornicator gives her husband less enthusiastic sex than she gave to others, she is defrauding him of the same respect that she showed to other guys. She consciously has chosen to disdain the husband that God so mercifully gave to a whore(who by God’s law deserves death) and she has refused to even cultivate her passion for what is her undeserved gift from God to enjoy. She does this because the love of God is not in her. If Christ were living in her, she would strive to love her husband more and more as she grew to know him better.

Ezekiel 16:32 You unfaithful wife! You desire strangers instead of your husband.

The prophet Ezekiel makes it clear that it is unfaithfulness for a wife to desire strangers instead of her own husband. If Christ were living in her she would cultivate her desire and her passion for her beloved. If she was having difficulty showing her husband the same respect she paid to others, she would be fasting and praying that God’s Holy Spirit would ignite a fire of passion inside her for her own husband. Do you blaspheme the Holy Spirit by believing the lie that God’s Holy Spirit is an evil cuckolding spirit living inside of women that causes them to defraud their husbands of the respect that they showed other sexually immoral men? Do you honestly believe that a woman filled with God’s Holy Spirit will go on sinning her entire life in such great unfaithfulness and not ever be convicted to see to it that she reverence her own husband as commanded in Ephesians 5:33?

Matthew 25:40 And the King will answer them, “Truly, I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brothers, you did it to me.” 41 Then he will say to those on his left, “Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.”

Wives serving other men too much is unfaithfulness to their own husbands.

For a woman to desire to serve other men more than her own husband, whether through her work or through her sexuality, is unfaithfulness to her vow to be his, forsaking all others. Women shouldn’t get married if they want to serve some other men rather than their husband, they should stay single if they don’t intend to serve their husband as a keeper of his house, and by their unfaithfulness blaspheme the word of God. As below the apostle Paul commanded the older women:

Titus 2:4 That they may teach the young women to be sober, to love their husbands, to love their children, 5 To be discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed.

The marital bed is holy and a pleasure that should be enjoyed at all times.

Younger women, like the one shown in the meme above, really should be married and at home serving a husband. Her young breasts and baby maker, really are her most highly desired job qualifications that no man has, and they are made for a divine purpose that no job can surpass, that brings God glory, for which she was lovingly and wonderfully created, to submit herself to an image of God, and become one flesh with him and bear the offspring of a god.(John 10:34)

Proverbs 5:18 Let thy fountain be blessed: and rejoice with the wife of thy youth. 19 Let her be as the loving hind and pleasant roe; let her breasts satisfy thee at all times; and be thou ravished always with her love. 20 And why wilt thou, my son, be ravished with a strange woman, and embrace the bosom of a stranger?

1 Timothy 2:15 But she shall be saved through her child-bearing, if they continue in faith and love and sanctification with sobriety.

Women work out their salvation by fulfilling their God-ordained role.

Getting a young woman trained in the ways of the Lord and married to a godly man and ready for keeping home should be her parents highest priority for her, because that is God’s highest priority for her and His purpose for making women. Young women should be taught to love their husbands, to love their children, to be discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed. That is real “Affirmative Action” for young women’s absolutely divine calling. What this evil world calls “Affirmative Action” for women is actually just defiance against God’s highest calling for women. I’ll let y’all ponder all the manifold ways the world tries to get young women into their camp. As their deceitfully “affirming” Feminist signs welcome young women into the workforce, telling them “Arbeit macht frei”, which means: “Work makes [you] free”.

The floor of one of the coffins of Gua, a physician of the governor Djehutyhotep. The paintings, dated to 1795 B.C., show the “two ways”—land and sea—that the dead could use to navigate the afterlife. An even older “Book of Two Ways” has now been unearthed. (Werner Forman/Universal Images Group via Getty Images)

Smithsonian magazine had an article mentioning ancient Egyptian beliefs about the afterlife:

“The inscriptions clearly quote the Book of Two Ways … such “coffin texts” were meant to “situate the deceased in the world of the gods,” … This particular sarcophagus was occupied by a high-status woman named Ankh, though the afterworld instructions in her final resting place actually refer to her as “he.”

“The funny thing is the whole idea of how you survive in the netherworld is expressed in male terms,” …

In ancient Egypt, rebirth was linked most closely to male gods; dead women, then, had to adopt the pronoun “he” to be more like Osiris himself …”

I had previously commented:

The Book of Enoch states that there are no females among the angels, because they were created to live forevermore, and therefore they had no need to reproduce themselves, like some had done with the daughters of men.
Enoch 15:5 It was for this reason that I gave [men] females, in order that they might cast seed into them, and, in this way, beget children by them, in order that descendants should never fail them upon the earth. 6 But you were existing as spirits, while living perpetual, and are immortal for all the generations of the age; 7 and this is why, I did not make females among you. …
I believe I was reading in the book of Jubilees when it was stated that all the redeemed in heaven will be given new incorruptible bodies that are male(sons of God) like the angels. But I can’t find the passage right at this moment. I believe Jesus may have been referring to those scriptures in the following passage:
Matthew 22:28 Therefore in the resurrection whose wife shall she be of the seven? for they all had her. 29 Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God. 30 For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.
So I currently wonder if women who are redeemed will quite literally become conformed, sharing in the image and glory of the Son. Will they become brethren, glorified, finally freed from their previously unresolved penis envy, and Eve’s curse?
Romans 8:29 For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren. 30 Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified.

Ray commented: “As for your speculations on women being made into males after the resurrection, I’ll comment later.” At this point I’m wondering about this concept that seems to have been an extra-Biblical belief, and may be hinted at or even indicated in the Bible itself, according to your interpretation:

Please share your speculations, opinions, revelations, scriptures, or any other thoughts.

I decided to make a post from a comment on the previous thread.

Commenter Swanny River queried: “I was reading Genesis 5 this morning and don’t recall what you said about verse 2. I like the explanation of Genesis 1:27, but I don’t remember about 5:2 and it does seem to be at odds with it. Was there a particular post you covered it?”

I have never before made a devoted post about Genesis 5, but I have referenced it in a few comments. As I have mentioned before the original Hebrew does not have punctuation, and Genesis 1:27 is a three line, or three complete sentence, Hebrew poem.

Genesis 1:27
So God created man in His own image.
In the image of God created He him.
Male and female created He them.

God first explains that He created Adam in his image, forward and then backwards, and then God contrasts that by saying that He only created “them” (which is not the word “Adam” in Hebrew) while contrastingly leaving off any mention of that creation being done in the image of God when referencing both male and Female combined. The male and female were not created in a combined event, but in two separate creation events, so their combined creation is a summarizing statement of two separate events, and those two separate creations when combined are never said to have been in the image of God. Reading that verse(Genesis 1:27) is when it first dawned on me, that God, the author, went to great lengths to never say that the woman, Eve, or both male and female, were created in the image or likeness of God, while saying four times, in Genesis 1:26-27, that Adam was created in God’s image or likeness.

Some English speaking folks insist on saying that line three of the poem given in Genesis 1:27 is not part of a separate sentence, but that it has to be referring, the male and female that were only said to be created, back to the statements about the man being created in the image of God. They do that partly because that is how it can seem in their English translations, but also because they would have to give up Feminism if God clearly made men superior, in the image of the Most High God, to be reverenced and obeyed by women who are created for men, to be men’s help.

So it is really telling that when an extremely similar restatement of the poem is again given in Genesis 5:1-2, they separate the verses right where the Feminists insist there is no separation, and right where I said there should be one. “Male and female created he them” is part of a whole new Bible verse, like I have taught that it could be divided and that the thoughts should be divided for better clarity in English.

Genesis 5:1(KJV) This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he him;
2 Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created.
3 And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his own likeness, and after his image; and called his name Seth:
4 And the days of Adam after he had begotten Seth were eight hundred years: and he begat sons and daughters:
5 And all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years: and he died.

Now again the Bible backs me up that when only referring to Seth, Adam’s son, Seth is referred to as being “in his(Adam’s) own likeness, and after his image”, making clear that the image and likeness of God transferred from father to son, like it did from Father God to Adam who was a son of God.(Luke 3:38) And yet again when both the sons and daughters of Adam are mentioned, the likeness and image are not mentioned because the combined group of both male and female are not in the father’s image. The daughters take after their mother’s image and likeness.

The King James Bible almost always gets the gender of gendered words correct, and if you check it you will never find the likeness or image of God said to be upon any living earthly woman. While it tells of men and Jesus Christ(a male) being the image and likeness of God in multiple places.

Now any Feminist is going to try to exploit the fact that in Genesis 5:2 all people, male and female are called or named after “Adam” the man, the father of mankind. Adam, in Hebrew, can mean: man or mankind, the first man, or ruddy(like clay). So also in English, the word “man” can refer to an individual male, all males, or even all humans. But “Adam”/”man” never refers to Eve individually, any individual woman, or womankind. “Adam”/”Man” only refers to women when they are lumped in with all men. That is a patriarchal colloquialism that God started, whereby we are called after our father, just like how my wife and kids all share my family name.

If God had wanted to make clear that Eve was in the image of God, he could have said that Eve, or the woman, was in the image of God but he clearly didn’t. The fact that all are called by the man’s Hebrew name “Adam”, is an honorary naming, that only goes to show that the man was created superior, and was the one by whom the others would want to be known by association. Just like today, wives and kids take on the man’s name, because he is the superior one, and it is an honor to be associated with your husband or father by name. Again I will mention that if both were equally made in the matchless image of God, the man would not be superior, but they would be equal. However only the man was made in God’s image and that is why it is such an honor for all to be called after his name, even to this day.

The believers of the church of Philadelphia(part of the bride of Christ) will be honored by being named after God and Christ: Revelation 3:12b I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, which is new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: and I will write upon him my new name.
I’m looking forward to that new family name! What an honor it will be.

So, in review: “Adam” meaning “man” was the first man’s name which became the family name of all people, we are now all collectively known as “man” or “mankind” in English, which is the translation of the Hebrew name or word “Adam”. That does not negate all the rest of what God clearly told us, just because God honored us all by calling us “Adam-kind”, however some folks, on the side of evil, will always try to negate the truth by whatever means they can. For further clarification see 1 Corinthians 11:7.

Bonus information:

Gary Naler has pointed out that when God counts people He usually only counts the men.
For example:
Matthew 14:21 And they that had eaten were about five thousand men, beside women and children.
Matthew 15:38 And they that did eat were four thousand men, beside women and children.
Exodus 12:37 And the children of Israel journeyed from Rameses to Succoth, about six hundred thousand on foot that were men, beside children. 38 And a mixed multitude went up also with them; and flocks, and herds, even very much cattle.
There are far too many examples to give them all.
While God certainly can and does count others, like in Jonah 4:11, He usually counts groups by the number of men present, and sometimes indicates there was also a multitude beside them. I think even God’s method of counting us has implications, as to God’s patriarchal priorities, that we may not have realized.