And they will willingly embrace it.

I’m an atheist and I think Trump is the antichrist.

- Me too
  
  Agreed.
I literally said the same thing to my wife last week. I grew up in an extremely religious household. I am not religious at all now, I haven't been for decades. But I made the joke that it would be hilarious if after all these bible thumbers voted for him, and he turned out to be the Antichrist 🤣🤣

When I was 8 or so, I prayed that god would wait to start the 7 years of tribulation until after I graduated college.

I graduated in 2019. Sorry guys.

Doomed by an 8 year old...
That gypsy was right.

If RFK is not pestilence in person I don't know who is

This is the funniest comment I have read in a while 🤣🤣🤣
Oh my God that's perfect

There was a web site dedicated to a proof that Trump has all the characteristics of the antichrist whereas Obama only has a few.

I can't seem to find it.

This?:
https://www.benjaminlcorey.com/could-american-evangelicals-spot-the-antichrist-heres-the-biblical-predictions/
- Author of the site updated it, and yes, Creepy indeed.
  
  So if Trump really is the antichrist and we’re already in the end times, do you think Elder Scrolls VI will come out before the world ends?
  Fr tho it’s freaky how much stuff lines up
  
  it will come out, but it will be a game with microtransactions and clunky gameplay mechanics with constant updates that break mods.
- this is actually horrifying to read

There’s an entire serious sub called (r/trump666). They are more level headed than you’d expect and downvote and mod people too far out there. They have a lot of deep serious discussions on which of the four horsemen Trump and Musk are. They seem to mostly disagree on which person is which dragon/beast/horsemen. Although, I think there’s an agreement that RFK Jr. is Pestilence haha

It’s all over my head but this concept is strong enough now that people devote significant time to reading the lay-lines.

Coincidentally my old handle on Gawker was a photo of Trump and my name was “DiabloHimself.” But that was back when he wasn’t running for office and just tweetsulting Roseanne.

Oh, I can't believe it's really him! Doug Forcette! Well, if anyone knows, it's this guy.

Glad to make your acquaintance and I hope my presence has brought some joy to your day so as to offset the points lost from the ant I stepped on this morning.

I wondered about it, but it seems he has to put himself in the place of Christ and require people to worship him instead (to "anti" Christ...) to really qualify. I think he is till pretending to be a Christian, so we may not be there yet...

The bar to being an anti-christ is pretty damn low. There's also no limit to how many exist all one needs is to deny the divinity of Christ. It's just that easy!
There some conflation with the "Man of Sin/Lawlessness" though who is supposed to be a "fierce King" who appears at the end of times and “will exalt and magnify himself above every god and will say unheard-of things against the God of gods. He will be successful until the time of wrath is completed."

You mean if you were Christian as my buddy Hassan is a devout Muslim and ge doesn't believe in this shit

Not just Christian, not all of us believe in an antichrist. Even among biblical literalists it's not 100%. Rapture, too. I don't believe in either
- I'm curious about how bible literalists that don't believe in the antichrist interpret that part of Revelations.
  
  Revelation (no ‘s’) doesn’t really have the narrative that “Biblical literalists” think it does. The Beast isn’t said to be the Antichrist - the “Antichrist” isn’t mentioned in Revelation at all, only in John IIRC - a lot of this is coming from Scofield and Darby. People before the 1800s did not believe in the narrative of “there’s a rapture where Christians disappear, the Antichrist takes over for 7 years, all of these prophecies are fulfilled, and the Jesus comes back.”
  It’s basically all made up through connecting unrelated passages in Daniel and Ezekiel. Premillennial dispensationalism is new and not reading the Bible “literally” at all.
  
  and the Jesus comes back
  Everybody please remember that you do not fuck with the Jesus.
  
  Guaranteed to have a typo when you nitpick spelling, but that sentence works well when read in a Ricky Bobby voice.
  The “Revelations” thing is a really funny way to pull off the classic atheist power move of knowing the Bible better than a Christian. Great for trolling eschatological TikTok and Facebook accounts.
  
  C'mon, Revelation vs Revelations is child's play. Everybody knows the real name is the Apocalypse of John.
  
  Agreed on the “revelations” thing. Once that tidbit sticks in your memory you just see people using it incorrectly everywhere.
  Maybe it’s a Baader-Meinhof effect thing, but I think it’s genuinely a very common mistake that’s very easy to make.
  Same with daylight saving(s) time. I hear other detail-oriented people add that S all the time.
  
  I know the rapture doesn't exist in the Bible but "the beast" does. What is the beast to literalists?
  
  Could be an Antichrist, could be a natural desire, could be Emperor Nero, could be something else. Being a “Biblical literalist” isn’t really something that makes sense, because at some point you do have to accept that some things are metaphor. The line being drawn is arbitrary, even if “literalists” don’t like to admit it. Revelation is especially obtuse and symbolic - though it does make sense if you realize it’s probably about Nero and John of Patmos was tripping balls on some kind of psilocybin.
  Revelation almost didn’t even make it in the Bible - the Shepherd of Hermas was more popular. I don’t think Jerome liked it.
  
  Thanks for the insight. I'm gonna go with the tripping balls theory cuz that book is weird as fuck.
  
  Yeah - and the fact that the book is weird as fuck is how Scofield and Darby (and later Hal Lindsey, Jenkins and Lehaye etc) were able to convince even people who don’t believe in the Bible that’s it’s some sort of hyper specific end times prophecy instead of the more likely reality that it’s a bunch of gematria (math magic games) and random symbolism as secret hints that Nero was a dickwad.
  
  So an allegorical work of fiction about politics not actually related to Christian theology?
  
  When you look at the Bible, how do you separate the “allegorical work[s] of fiction about politics” to the ones about theology?
  It’s almost as if it’s a mish mash of various folk stories, history, propaganda (with a ton of tension in the Pentateuch which often does things like repeat the exact same story twice with minor differences because it’s clear that there’s being an attempt to reconcile the kingdom of Judah with the kingdom of Israel and or later justify King David’s more shitty actions…)
  Lots of pop theology is completely absent from the Bible. I feel like a random person could read the Koran and figure out the shahada, but even the idea that Jesus was the Son of God, died for your sins and was resurrected doesn’t even peek through until John, which was the last gospel to be written. Pretty sure the Q author and the sayings source thought of Jesus as a prophet - not the Messiah. Most understandings of hell and Satan are entirely Dante and Milton (filtered through pop culture).
  Edit: my personal “belief” - Jesus was a Jewish political dissident that was martyred by the Roman state. His followers understood him as being the Messiah in a war sense - to lead some sort of revolt against the Romans. Then he just fucking dies and they have to figure out how to cope.
  There’s a bunch of these iterant preacher types during the era - things kinda sucked. The “Babylonian Exile” 2 electric boogaloo. Josephus, kinda the main neutral source to Jesus existing, had participated in a revolt/mass suicide against the Roman’s (basically everyone except Josephus killed themselves, and he was like ‘nah’ and had a pretty nice life as a Roman historian). Historians are pretty sure John the Baptist was real, and he was probably one of these types (he bit where he baptized Jesus is very clearly an attempt to be like “hey, if you like this guy he actually liked our guy even more.”)
  So Jesus was probably very anti Roman, and killed by the Roman state as a potential revolutionary leader. Later, Paul (or his forgers) realizes that rewriting some of the theology a bit to be more sympathetic to power might be helpful.