Nicola Barker

The End of Times and the coming of the Antichrist

Philip C. Almond traces the religious and cultural history of the figure variously seen as the Beast, an evil pope, Napoleon or Mohammed

The Antichrist depicted in 12th-century Spanish version of The Commentary on the Apocalypse by Beatus of Liébana. Credit: Bridgeman Images 
issue 19 December 2020

Two things it may be wise to know before picking up this relatively short and surprisingly cheerful brand spanking NEW biography of the Antichrist: (1) the meaning of the word ‘eschatological’ (it’s fairly critical); (2) the fact that the Antichrist is not the devil (a common misapprehension). The Antichrist is actually the son/spawn of the devil, and Philip C. Almond has already provided us with a perfectly serviceable biography of the Prince of Darkness himself (also NEW, even though, um, a few years old now).

As a religious/cultural figure the Antichrist was actually a bit of a slow starter. The earliest and most comprehensive text about him, Adso’s A Little Book About the Antichrist (essentially 990 AD’s answer to our present-day The Little Book of Calm) was conceived as a kind of roundabout response to a couple of critical dilemmas facing the fledgling Christian church. The first focused on the question of evil: why did evil continue to blight human experience if Christ had truly died to save us from our sins? Almond argues that

the Antichrist became… a key component of a Christian providentialism that demanded, in spite of the redemption of Christ already effected, a final resolution of cosmic and human evil.

Another (and possibly more pressing) dilemma facing the church related to Christ’s second coming (which, since Jesus had preached an apocalyptic world view, was firmly believed to be imminent by his early followers and disciples).

Comments

Join the debate for just $5 for 3 months

Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for $5.

Already a subscriber? Log in