In Richard Rohr’s highly acclaimed and revolutionary book The Universal Christ, he laid out a vision of Christ long lost in the dogma and structure of institutional Christianity, one that is radically inclusive and all-encompassing. Rohr is heralding a return to Christian mysticism, not for the few, but for all. To have such a popular voice opening up new possibilities in the Christian faith is an exciting moment in global spirituality. 

This more expansive vision of Christ is the aspect of God which is active in and woven throughout Creation, truly the creative Logos by which Christ is identified in the first chapter of John. Logos was a term borrowed from Greek philosophers, which represented the ordering, creative principle of the universe, which was later translated in John to “the Word,” as in, 

1 In the beginning was the Word (Logos/Christ). And the Word was with God. And the Word was God.

2 The same was in the beginning with God.

3 All things were made by Him, and without Him was not anything made that was made.

4 In Him was life. And that life was the Light of man.

5 And the Light shines in the darkness. And the darkness has not understood it.

This also approaches how other mystical thinkers have conceptualized the Holy Trinity, with the Son (Christ) being the active, personal, and tangible aspect of God, the Father being the transcendental, unknowable, infinite ground of being, and the Holy Spirit being God’s immanence permeating Creation and serving as helper. 

All of this is great news for those of us who long to see the world’s largest faith evolve.

Today I’d like to apply this expanded concept of Christ to another question: is there a corresponding universal anti-Christ? If Christ is “The Light of All Men” (all people), and we all have that Light of Christ within us, is there also a corresponding darkness? If so, what is its nature? 

Is the choice between Christ and anti-Christ the central decision of our lives?

Light, Love, and Darkness

If we’re to zero in on a definition of a universal anti-Christ, we should also elucidate what is the universal Christ. Of course, rather than being a single man that lived some 2,000 odd years ago, the universal Christ concept is one of the universal Light within all creation, and especially as it appears in humanity. 

So, what is the “Light of all men?” Is there a singular Light we all share? Is this just a metaphor, or something very real? What’s it got to do with Love?

This is the question that Richard Rohr explored to a large extent in his book, of course with a diplomatic, ecumenical Christian angle. However, if we approach the question from a more general mystical or perennialist point of view, then we might say that this Light we all share is the Light of consciousness itself, the Light of spirit, of awareness. 

How did this come to be referred to or thought of as Light? I doubt there is a clear historical way to answer that question, but it’s no great leap if you think about it. After all, when do we become aware of things? When they are illuminated, of course. When our surroundings are in darkness, we don’t know what’s there. So, the connection of Light to awareness at least metaphorically doesn’t really require too much explanation. 

Does it end there? I suspect not. There is an experience which we might call inner Light, which is not metaphorical, but a very real fact of our experience. Take, for instance, any feeling you’ve had of joy, inspiration, love, ecstasy, and if you reflect on it carefully, you’ll notice that all of these experiences have a certain quality of an inner sense of brightness, and in the case of love, warmth as well. 

When we feel this inner Light, we also feel an expansion of our own awareness, and happiness. This should be no surprise to anyone well-versed in the mystical philosophy of Vedanta, since the core of our self is known to have the qualities Sat-Chit-Ananda, roughly translated as Existence-Consciousness-Bliss. In the same way that water is intrinsically wet, transparent, and flowing, awareness is intrinsically existence, consciousness, and bliss.

This is also known to be the essence of God, for ultimately, the deepest self is one with God. This departs from the standard Christian view, but I believe that the universal Christ concept takes a step in that direction.

Christ on the Cross

Yet, there seems to be something more to the concept of a Universal Christ than merely defining it as a universal Light of awareness. Christ doesn’t simply shine in the heart of every person, but from the Christian perspective, also came in the form of a man, to reveal its nature to us through the metaphor of a human life. Since we learn best from stories, you could say, Christ came and acted out a story for us, to teach us how best to embody this Light which dwells in all of us.

And what was the ultimate lesson of that life? In short, it was to prioritize, depend on, love, and ultimately surrender to God. We see this also reflected in the great saints of India, many of whom had a very devotional aspect, such as Sri Ramakrishna, Paramhansa Yogananda, or Ananda Mayi Ma, all of whom had a devotional, surrendering relationship to God as the greater self, even while simultaneously knowing their smaller selves to be one with God, as Christ did.

I see the most beautiful symbolic rendering of this in the life of Christ as none other than his being nailed to the cross. I wonder how many Christians have considered in detail the symbolism of this image, which especially in Catholicism, is so ubiquitously present in the form of the crucifix?

In Christ on the cross, we see the image of an all-powerful being, choosing to allow himself to be tortured and killed, rather than turn and attack his persecutors. His hands, which are symbolically the instruments of will with which we act upon the world, are nailed down and immobilized, leaving his heart wide open, undefended, and his head is adorned with a painful crown of thorns.

This image is the opposite of the sort of warrior king that the Jews of his time were hoping for, someone to lead their nation to conquer the world and realize their version of heaven on earth. Beyond the traditional interpretations of this image, what can we say it represents from a more universal, mystical point of view?

The Universal Predicament

I’ve written in previous articles about how Near Death Experiences are among the best evidence we have for consciousness beyond the physical, and that their revelations are some of the greatest resources for how we should view this life. In these experiences, people of various religions backgrounds and cultures are told that the purpose of this life is to learn how to love, how to be loving souls. 

What does this have to do with the universal Christ, and anti-Christ? I believe that these two fundamental forces are present in all of us, that they have to do with love and will, and that the mystical worldview can help us to understand what both of them are.

We know from the mystical worldview, and can verify by reflection on our own experience, that we have a fundamental human condition. That condition is of being a consciousness seemingly embedded in a world, which mystics tell us is a kind of dream, and which causes us to at times be happy, and at other times to suffer. In terms of the universal Christ concept discussed above, we might say it causes our inner Light to expand sometimes, and to contract at other times.

This expansion and contraction of our inner Light is also what manifests our desires and aversions, because we desire those things which cause it to expand to some degree, and are averse to those things which cause it to contract.

My favorite metaphor for this mystical view is that all of existence is God Dreaming. So, you could say that each of us, as God dreaming of being individual souls, has the fundamental predicament of being in a dreamworld which does not always fulfill what we, according to our individual qualities, require in order to be happy, loving, joyful, or illuminated souls. It forces upon us conditions which cause our inner Light to contract.

By virtue of being embedded in these bodies and this world, in other words, we are presented with the fundamental obstacle of a dream which does not suit our preferences, which does not fulfill the requirements we have taken on, consciously or unconsciously, to be loving souls.

Have you ever noticed that you have requirements to being a loving soul?

For instance, a common one is, “I will be a loving soul IF my bodily needs of hunger, thirst, sleep, etc. are taken care of.” Another one might be, “I will be a loving soul IF I don’t have to sit in traffic today.” How about, “I will be a loving soul IF my friends and family behave in ways I find acceptable.” There are myriad expectations which we have of our dreamworld environs and it’s characters and contents, and these are in fact conditions we place on our own Love. 

This is actually the definition of conditional love, although we normally think of it in terms of another person, i.e. I love you IF you _________. However, you can actually view this conditionality as a central element of your relationship not just to a lover or some other person, but to the entire dream: I will be a loving soul IF the dream is as I want it to be. But, of course, it will never always be as you would have it, it has a mind of it’s own, so-to-speak.

Not only does the very fact of our physical existence contain intrinsic suffering, as Buddha was so adamant to point out, but we also share a world with many other souls who are often not as we’d prefer them to be.

This is our fundamental dilemma: the dream doesn’t do what we want it to. It argues with us, it ages us, it lies to us, it steals from us, it infects us, it rapes us, it nails us to the cross. 

So, what are we to do with this unwieldy dream? How are we to handle the quintessential predicament of the human condition, or rather, the soul condition, the condition of any conscious aware being with love and will?

The Universal Choice

I propose that everything we do in this life contains a fundamental, universal choice. This choice involves two primary elements: Love and Will. 

What do you do with a dream that won’t conform to your desires? You can do two things: You can control it and make it fulfill your desires, or you can control your desires, and love it anyway, which is another way of saying allow love to shine in you regardless of the fact that the dream you’re aware of at the moment doesn’t suit your preferences. The first maintains and solidifies your finite boundaries of self, your ego, and the other liquifies it, to some degree.

The choice is between will over love, and love over will. 

Think of any situation where things are not as you want them to be, especially where people are not as you want them to be. Whatever you do about that situation, it involves two primary options: love them in spite of their being problematic for your desires, or find some way to manipulate them into fulfilling your desires. Pretty much every way of engaging with them is either one of those two things, or some combination of them.

Of course, we all have love and will, and usually both are involved in some way. It requires some will to learn how to love in spite of conditions, and it takes some love to use will to control the world into fulfilling your desires, at least love for the object of your desire. The question is not whether you will do one of these two things exclusively, but which will be the primary governing force over your life, your thoughts, and your actions.

I am proposing that part of what is represented by the universal Christ, like Jesus with his hands of will nailed to the cross of materiality and his heart of love wide open, is to love in spite of the dream. After all, didn’t he ask God to forgive the very people who had hung him on that cross, because they knew not what they did? That is the quintessential example of loving in spite of circumstance. 

In that statement, Jesus was referring to the ignorant people crucifying him much in the same way John 1:5 was referring to the darkness, or the dream: it does not comprehend the Light, in it’s true nature, and therefore, it knows not what it does.

The correct response to it, therefore, the Christic response, is to forgive it, to love it, no matter how atrocious it becomes. To sacrifice your own desire, and shine with love regardless of the delusory dream’s antics.

The Universal Anti-Christ

So, it follows naturally that the universal anti-Christ would be the opposite, the choice to control the dream to serve your desires, to manipulate people to be as you want them to be, to serve by willpower your requirements for feeling your own inner Light (your desires), rather than surrendering and feeling your inner Light regardless of your desires.

In its essence, it’s the luciferian attempt to make the small ego-self become like God, to control the creation according to its small, petty desires. 

While this may sound abstract and grandiose, we don’t have to look far to see that it exists within each of us, within many of the things we have done in our lives. How many times have you attempted to manipulate someone? How many times have you tried to subtly control someone you were in a relationship with? How many times have you fulfilled your desires at the cost of someone else’s suffering?

Yet, just as most of us are not great saints, nor are we great devils. Most of us fluctuate between these two forces, sometimes more Christ-like, sometimes more anti-Christ-like, but never too much of either. There’s no use feeling guilty for having a little bit of anti-Christ tendency, as it’s practically unavoidable.

Yet, there are those in whom either Christ or anti-Christ predominate, and become either angelic or demonic. These examples make the nature of anti-Christ more clear, just as Jesus and other great saints make the nature of Christ more clear.

So, where do we see the greatest examples of anti-Christ in this world? Who is most obsessed with controlling the world around them, to suit their desires?

Just as the Christ acts through some to do more good than in those of us who are more of a mixed bag, so do those who are polarized toward the anti-Christ choice do the greatest evil. They are the cause of the majority of the wars, poverty, and unnecessary suffering in this world, or at least the nexus points which allow our collective anti-Christ inclinations to manifest these things. 

Anti-Christ Intellectualism

One way that I believe the anti-Christ archetype manifests through us is in the intellectual domain. Not that being intellectual is anti-Christic in and of itself, but certain intellectual practices we see dominating in our culture are. Here, I’m thinking specifically of scientism, materialism, atheism, or the more archetypal pattern of which they are all a manifestation.

Undoubtedly to many people, this will seem harsh and out of left field. Why is this a manifestation of anti-Christ? Most people in secular society consider it to be a relatively neutral choice to be a scientific materialist or atheist; it’s just being very skeptical, right? Sometimes, that’s true, and no doubt there are many very loving souls who simply rejected organized religion, but nevertheless manifest the Christic choice without any belief in a higher power, per se.

It’s not so much that science is intrinsically anti-Christic. In fact, I think science can be a deeply spiritual endeavor, in the sense that God is revealed through studying the dream through which God manifests Godself. However, scientism is not science, and materialism is not a search for the truth. Rather, they are dogmas built upon a fundamental stance or orientation toward truth and reality that is anti-Christic, because it’s all about control, will, and ego.

For instance, the fundamental assumption behind scientism is that only science can tell us what’s true about reality; the flip side of that statement is that anything which science can’t measure and predict must be false, non-existent. This essentially reduces the ontological status of the world to only the domain of things that are within the scope of our ability to know sufficiently to control. 

This ideology is not built into science, but is a certain way of approaching it; we could just as easily study the world scientifically for the sheer awe and joy of discovering it, and to heal and help people. Indeed, those are the reasons that many people do science. It can also be neatly integrated with an understanding that there are things beyond the purview of science, such as spiritual realities, and many scientists do understand these things.

Instead, scientism and materialism choose to deny the ontological existence of anything that they can’t measure and control, which is tantamount to “killing God” in the mind, in Luciferian fashion. This ultimately culminates in what could be called the “cult of the rational intellect,” which manifests as an obsession with technology and transhumanism, which is ultimately just a quest to put the entire universe under our control, from our bodies to the planets and stars themselves, to become technological gods.

Even beyond scientism and materialism, I would argue that the modern Western approach to intellect in general has a strong archetypal anti-Christ element. For instance, the idea that we make “claims” as if we are conquering intellectual “territory,” that argumentation and debate are the best way to find truth, with whoever can be most convincing being the arbiter of truth, the rigid power structures in institutions of knowledge, and even the fundamental desire to be right, to know with absolute certainty and to shoot down anyone who disagrees, is essentially all about control in the mental realm.

If we don’t know, and live in the mystery, then we are not in control and feel less secure, if we have no faith. Materialism and positivism attempts to replace faith, to feel secure not because of connection to something higher, but because of our confidence in our grasp on what’s real and true, even if the picture it paints of what’s real and true is hopelessly depressing.

These are just a few ways I think the anti-Christ archetype manifests intellectually. Far from being harmless, I think the modern trend toward technocracy stems from this.

Anti-Christ Religion

Of course, it would be irresponsible to point out how the anti-religious can be a manifestation of anti-Christ, without also pointing out how it can and does manifest in religion. This form of anti-Christ has been with us for much longer, and has arguably done much more damage.

Defining how certain forms of religion can be anti-Christic is a bit tricky, because it doesn’t seem to be about the self. There is a collectivizing of the identity, and so the individual usually feels that they are devoted to God, and that is why they are seeking to control others. However, a bit of reflection can reveal this as not quite what it seems.

In my opinion, much of traditional religion is the projection of the small self onto God. Perhaps this is why the Universal Christ comes into a human form, to show us God via a person, because the vast majority of people seem incapable of understanding God in any other way. So, we create God in our image, and project the qualities we associate with being good onto the Divine, rather than seeking to understand it objectively. We project our ego onto God.

Religions from around the world have long assumed that they had the absolute Truth, and that the rest of the world must inevitably accept it, whether by conviction or conquest. The ancient Jews, for instance, believed that their god was like a king on his throne, and expected their Messiah to be a powerful leader who would establish their rule on earth. Christianity has of course been tightly connected to the concept of empire and domination, and has acted that concept out to a much greater extent.

Likewise, much of Islam sees jihad as righteous, and believes that God wants them to take over the world and convert everyone to Islam, and according to some, kill those who refuse. This dogmatism, present in all the Abrahamic religions and some others, is the principle defining element of anti-Christ religion, because the desire to convert others, to make others believe what you believe, and to someday have an entire world which only has your religion, is obviously anti-Christic, even if the control obsession is conceptually “outsourced” to a higher power.

It’s still ultimately a matter of controlling the dream, in this case, to eradicate anyone who believes in a different concept of god, holy scripture, or worldview than your ego finds acceptable.

Anti-Christ Power Structures

The domain of political and economic power is where the anti-Christ archetype seems the most obvious to me. This may ruffle some feathers, but as I have written about elsewhere, the definition of ownership is control, and some people become obsessed with endlessly expanding that which they own and control, i.e. wealth accumulation. I think the anti-Christ aspect of this is unavoidable, because the basis of the whole endeavor is to own and control as much as possible, often to the detriment of others. 

What is owned and controlled? Pieces of the dreams God is having, of course. So, from the mystical worldview I often discuss here at A.L., the endless expansion of that which one owns is also an endless effort to control as much of the dream as possible.

While it’s no great sin to own and control some things, when people begin trying to expand their ownership into large “empires,” this is where the anti-Christ archetype seems to be taking over. 

This gives a new meaning to the old verses in the bible which state that the devil is the ruler of “this world.” We’re not talking about a literal pitchfork-wielding spirit whispering in dicatators’ and billionaires’ ears. Nevertheless, it would be hard to argue that the archetype of anti-Christ I’m describing here doesn’t indeed rule the world, since all who rule over this world embody it, by definition, simply because they are trying to control God’s dream to a ridiculous extent.

Think of the way that the most wealthy and powerful people live. What is the nature of the luxury they enjoy, which motivates them to expand their wealth and power? They dwell in manicured, gated communities, surrounded by people who are paid to do their bidding, not a single nook or cranny of which is permitted to contradict their preferences. They enjoy almost no limitations in the worldly sense, they can indulge in any pleasure, travel to any place, taste any experience money can buy, all because of how much they own, which is another way of saying how much they control. 

I speak about the rich because in modern capitalist society this is how anti-Christ manifests most often, but you could easily apply the exact same principle to communist dictators, or the kings, queens, tzars, and emperors of all history. Of course, the clearest manifestation of anti-Christ in worldly systems of power is slavery, where other human beings are entirely subjugated without compassion, but even economic exploitation is a lesser version of the same thing.

Anti-Christ Occultism

So far, I’ve spoken about how the anti-Christ pattern emerges in worldly matters, but is it limited only to the physical? I don’t see why it should be, and in fact if we look at how people interact with metaphysical realities, we can find plenty there, as well. 

The most familiar form this takes to us will be elements of Western occultism, although it’s by no means limited to one culture. “Dark” or manipulative uses of magic have existed in many forms probably throughout human evolution, if the dark shamanism found among indigenous tribes is any indication. 

Essentially, this is any area in the realm of magick or metaphysics where we become overly focused on controlling reality to fulfill our desires. As with normal, mundane reality, some amount of this is expected, and is not particularly problematic, just as it’s expected we’ll want to own and control a handful of possessions. However, just as some people become obsessed with owning as much as possible, some become obsessed with controlling the dream and other people through magical means as much as possible. 

This is especially obvious in the left hand path, where “Do As Thou Will is the whole of the Law.” Satanism, when it’s not simply a farcical mockery of theistic religion, also contains a strong element of this, and satanic imagery is often used in left hand path or black magick rituals. We can even see it in the extremes of “Law of Attraction,” where people may try to endlessly fulfill their desires through “manifesting” riches and luxury. 

Finally, and perhaps most diabolically, the various types and systems of mind control, whether through ritual abuse, drugging as in the case of voodoo zombies, or government-run MK-Ultra type programs are some of the most extreme examples of anti-Christ in the spiritual realm, because they are not only focused on control and desire, but also sacrificing any compassion for the humanity of the person being controlled, in the process. 

Mind control is perhaps the clearest case of sacrificing love for will and desire, the essence of the anti-Christ choice. It goes even beyond slavery, controlling not merely the body, but the mind as well.

The Common Thread

I’ve spoken about how I think the anti-Christ pattern, which could also be described as a deep archetypal choice, plays out in various domains. So, what is the common pattern among God-killing materialist zealots, wealth-obsessed aristocrats and dictators, and black magicians and mind-control maniacs?

The common thread which runs through all of these is the fundamental choice to experience one’s inner Light in a distorted way, only by controlling the dream to fulfill one’s desires, rather than by sacrificing the ego with its desires to unleash the Light that dwells within, in it’s more natural form as love and joy.

Put another way, the anti-Christ choice is to choose the ego over God, to engage in a Luciferian rebellion within oneself, to try to make the small self into an all-powerful, all-knowing god, instead of recognizing that you and every other being already are the one infinite God, and these little selves and their desires are but dreams. 

The Christic choice to sacrifice the small self and open the heart in spite of dream circumstances produces beings in whom the Light of the Infinite God shines brightly as love and wisdom to guide and warm those around them. In this way, Christic community serves to uplift all involved, and accelerate one-another’s evolution.

What are the results of the anti-Christ choice?

The Role of Anti-Christ

As I’ve written previously in my piece on the Problem of Evil, I don’t think it’s necessarily some kind of mistake or tragedy or wrong that evil or anti-Christ exists. For one thing, it’s simply built into the dream of being a separate self, at least as a potential. You could even say that all separate self or ego is, in a sense, inherently part anti-Christ, or at least has the seed of it, which only grows to full-fledged evil in some people. 

Still, should we wish that some people would never take the choice of ego over God to such extremes as mind-control or enslavement? On the human level, of course we wish they wouldn’t. However, if we attempt to take a God’s eye view, seeing all of the divine Dream as a cosmic drama in which we gradually awaken, it becomes more apparent that evil or anti-Christ may play an important role. 

Actually, in a way, anti-Christ activity in the world creates more opportunities for Christic activity. For instance, when there is an evil dictator enslaving people, it creates a dream opportunity for others to heroically sacrifice their own desires for the sake of compassion, to put a stop to it. In this way, anti-Christ may have a catalyzing effect on the development of Christ within us.

Those who fought the Nazis, for instance, probably didn’t want to die at Normandy, but they did so because of the tremendous suffering being inflicted upon the world, or at least that impulse has to have played a large part. Likewise, the British and their lust for power created the opportunity for Gandhi and his movement to engage in less violent, but still sacrificial Christic actions. Non-violent resistance like this, I would say, is even more Christic.

So, in a way, those who choose to embody what I’m calling here the Universal Anti-Christ are playing a role of villain which may even be necessary for God’s Dream to unfold and serve its purpose. Is it possible that if there were no such villains, there would also be no corresponding heroes and saints? If there were no evil, would there be less opportunity or reason to do good? Without a polarization of good and evil, would God be having a more lukewarm, less interesting Dream?