How has Trump avoided the "Antichrist" label?

And eventually, Trumpism. A cross can easily be changed to a “T”.

For the same reason Trump has retired the old trope (sometime attributed to Sinclair Lewis) that “When fascism comes to America it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross.”

At no point has Trump made a remotely convincing case he is either Christian or Patriotic. He just turned up and said racist stuff, and his Fascist ass got elected anyway.

Likewise it was always said that the anti-Christ (I’m saying this as someone who was raised on 80s apocalyptic Christian teachings) would be a silver-tongued charmer who appeared good and peaceful to most people (and, it was implied, have a reasonable degree of competence), and only be shown to be a brutal dictator after he gained power. Trump pretty much ran, and governed, on a platform of evil.

That’s not even hyperbole, I would have said 5 years ago that evil is a pretty ambiguous term, and its really hard to unambiguously assign “evil” in real life, in the sense of a dichotomous “good vs evil”.

Now you can now largely divide the world into “not evil” and “people or movements supported by Trump”.

I am not an expert on Revelations, but I found this passage in Dr. Lester Sumrall’s “Why the World Will Hail the Antichrist" to be quite apropos:


I believe in every generation you get what belongs to you. For example, the residents we elect are a replica of the people who voted them into office. If the majority of the people in our nation are without God, then they will put in the Presidency a person without God. If the people are bad, they will elect a bad president.


The Antichrist will completely represent the popular conception of life at the time of his appearing. He will not seem to be a strange person. In fact, he will seem quite normal to the majority of the people. Millions of people around the earth will adore him and say, “He’s just like me. He believes just like I do.” Antichrist will be a perfect reflection of the soul and the mind of thepeople, his followers.

But Trump has been unpopular from the onset of his presidency, and with the rest of the world. In America, over 50 percent have always disapproved. In the rest of the world, especially the West, it’s probably something like 70-80 percent disapproval.

Doesn’t sound at all like a description of “the world will hail the Antichrist.”

Well, seeing as the actual name of the book is Revelation


But don’t you know, Hell has an Electoral College?

I realize this is quoting another person (Dr. Lester Sumrall) but I do want to push back against any idea that “If the majority of the people in our nation are without God” they’ll elect a “bad president”.
(And maybe he’s not saying that. Maybe he just meant “Secular people will elect a secular President–good secular people will elect a good secular President and bad secular people will elect a bad secular President; while good religious people will elect a good religious President and bad religious people will elect a bad religious President.” Maybe that’s what he meant…but I doubt it.)

Data from Pew Research:

The people in America who are “without God” (the atheists, agnostics, freethinkers, secular humanists, people who sleep in on Sundays, apatheists, the “spiritual but not religious”, the people who just shrug their shoulders and say “Gee, I dunno” at questions of Ultimate Meaning, and no doubt various people with their very own religions they made up for themselves–in other words, the “Nones”, all the people who mark “none of the above” for religion, classified as “religiously unaffiliated” in that Pew Research poll) voted for the Methodist church lady by a landslide margin, 68% to 26%. American Jews went for Clinton 71% to 24%. American adherents of non-Christian/non-Jewish religions–American Muslims and American Hindus and so on–went for Clinton by 62% to 29%.

Meanwhile, the most professedly devoutly Christian and loudly pious segment of the population–“White born-again/evangelical Christians”–voted for the guy who makes a pretty convincing candidate for being “the Antichrist” by 81% to 16%. Not only that, but the only segment of the “Christian” population in that poll that went against Trump were Hispanic Catholics (67% to 26%). “Catholics” as a whole went for Trump, 52% to 45% (because White Catholics went for Trump by 60% to 37%). “Protestants/other Christian” as a whole went for Trump by 58% to 39%. IIRC specifically African-American Protestants did reject Trump by a landslide (that’s not actually broken out on that page either way). Oh, and if you look at the table for “Presidential vote by religious attendance”, the more often people said they attended religious services, the more likely they were to vote for Trump.

The point is, being “without God” had fuck-all to do with supporting Trump; to the contrary, being “with God”–or “with the Christian God” at least–was a pretty good predictor of whether or not a person voted for Trump in 2016 (with the caveat that if you take not only religion but also “race”/ethnicity into account, some pretty devoutly Christian groups did reject Trump by large margins).

Religion and morality are two separate things. They have basically nothing to do with each other.

Were I a more cynical man (and I am), I might postulate that those groups most likely to put blind faith in religious authority and religious narratives that appeal to them are also those most likely to put blind faith in political authority and political narratives that appeal to them. Not all believers (nor even all Christians) are unquestioning in their acceptance of what they are told, but there’s definitely a strong strain of it in white Christian America.

This is an excellent question because I’ve wondered about the very same thing. If anyone’s life is “Anti-Christian” in every conceivable possible way, it is the life of Donald Trump. Yet, people like the Pope and Obama get tagged with the name, but a man with absolutely no moral compass whatsoever doesn’t?!

I attribute it to the fact that those on the liberal left are far more likely to take the high road and avoid name calling and vicious attacks than the Republican Right, which has made an art form of shredding people’s character unjustly.

AntiChrist/Beast/Head of the Beast are different things, but commonly taken along the lines as the human head of Satan on earth, or a form of Satan personified or a dedicated servant of Satan or even Satan’s child.

As such Trump does possess much of the traits of the beast, or a head of the beast, and does fit, though it does require a very merciful God for Trump to be this ‘nice’, which I do believe in such a merciful God. God does limit human suffering and that fits with the current model that Trump can be many times worse, so far he is doing the minimum required in terms of evil to qualify, along the lines of Hitler (though Hitler had more power). I also have a hunch that the heads of the beast appear and have appeared at different times in human history (Hitler being the last head to appear, and many that were seen to die at his hand were actually ‘raptured’ and did not suffer death), and why the scriptures speak that the end times are soon, because it happens all along history. It’s a beast that lives beyond our spacetime, with it’s heads appearing at different times in history in a human form.

So I suspect partly because many Christians expect a worse beast then Trump is currently, don’t understand that the beast is not bound by our spacetime, and because they expect a less merciful God. Also the scriptures indicate that the masses will be deceived by the Beast and his ilk, so yeah, they won’t see Trump’s evil as evil, but will call evil good.

I think it’s more that people generally care far more about a politician’s perceived policy/platform and which direction it’s believed he will take a nation in, than his character.

Obama = polite, educated, relatively mild-mannered, but perceived as taking America in direction of globalism, liberalism, LGBT, feminism, atheism, etc. = “He may be the Antichrist.”

Trump = rude, bloviating, narcissistic, thin-skinned, but perceived as taking America in the direction of patriotism, national pride, revival, strength, USA-first, conservatism and traditionalism = “NOT the Antichrist.”

See kids, despite what the victims and everyone else thought, it turns out the Holocaust had a happy ending after all!

He hasn’t among more liberal Christians. I’ve heard him called an anti-Christ quite a few times.

But just to be clear here:

  1. Anybody who “perceived” that Barack “We worship an awesome God in the blue states” Obama was somehow taking America in the direction of atheism was and is a fucking idiot.
  2. Given the actual data on who voted against “the Antichrist” and who voted for “the Antichrist” in 2016, this country could damned well stand to be nudged in a more atheistic direction.

On the whole, those on the more liberal side of the spectrum don’t actually believe in an “Antichrist”, so they don’t really see the point in labelling him that way.

On the other hand, evangelical Christians who actually believe wholeheartedly in an Antichrist tend to be Trump supporters, so they would not call him that. Even though it’s explicitly stated that the Antichrist will fool many people. They don’t think they’ve been fooled.

The Antichrist is supposed to become almost universally loved after he solves the entire world’s problems and brings peace to the earth.

Trump doing that? I suppose it still could happen but I’m not holding my breath.

Wait, he won all those “Noble” prizes and was Michigan Man of the Year too many times to recount. That’s love.

I’m an atheist but seeing Trump has made the whole Antichrist thing more plausible. It’s hard to imagine anyone more unlike Christ.

Aldous Huxley, Brave New World, Charing T Tower. Indeed. Well spotted. You don’t call yourself Shakespeare in vain.

I gotta say that watching the evangelicals (both leaders and followers) largely falling over themselves to worship Trump has certainly made me think much more highly of them as ethically aware caring people devoted to an inherently Good cause worthy of great respect and deference. [/sarcasm]