Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Home
Progressive Christian
T.F.: Chairface Carpathia

T.F.: Chairface Carpathia

Last updated on: November 3, 2015 at 7:53 am by Fred Clark

T.F.: Chairface Carpathia 2015-11-02T16:54:07-05:00 Fred Clark

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

(Originally posted November 10, 2010. This got lost in the migration from TypePad to WordPress, recovered and reposted for the archives here thanks to the Internet Archive Wayback Machine.)

Tribulation Force, pp. 281-289

Nicolae Carpathia is supposed to be The Antichrist, which is a pretty big deal in premillennial dispensationalist mythology. That makes him the first horseman of the Apocalypse, the Beast, the epitome and embodiment of pure evil. He’s supposed to be superlative and historic — the most evil powerful man and the most powerful evil man of all time.

So far, though, it’s hard to take him seriously. He’s bumblingly through the first stages of his master plan, getting himself hopelessly bogged down in details that seem less evil than simply arbitrary and weird.

For example, Nicolae plans to rebuild the Temple in Jerusalem. That might be considered evil if he were doing it just to desecrate the Islamic holy site currently sitting there in an effort to start a deadly war, but instead he’s carefully negotiated an amicable (if ridiculously implausible) solution to this age-old conflict. But I guess we’re still supposed to regard the rebuilding of the Temple as evil because, well, Herod did the same thing, and Herod was evil. All that does, though, is invite a comparison between Herod’s cruelty and tyranny and Nicolae’s, and frankly Nicolae just doesn’t seem like he’s in Herod’s league.

Herod, remember, had that whole slaughter-of-the-innocents thing, while the only people Nicolae has killed so far were a journalistic rival of Buck’s and a couple of outright villains. Stonagal and Todd-Cothran ought to have been arrested rather than murdered in cold blood but, still, killing them seems less the work of Satan incarnate than of Charles Bronson in Death Wish incarnate. To be fair, of course, Nicolae couldn’t have slaughtered every infant in Bethlehem even if he’d wanted to, since God beat him to it by wiping out every infant and child on earth, but one would expect some kind of mass-slaughter from the Beast from Hell. It doesn’t say much about Nicolae as an evil tyrant that he rates below a guy like Herod who probably doesn’t even rank in the Top 10 of cruel tyrants from his own century, let alone all time.

Or consider Nicolae’s grand scheme of relocating the United Nations headquarters to an as-yet-unbuilt city in the Iraqi desert. That’s capricious and foolish, but not so much evil as just terribly wasteful and inconvenient. Naming this new city “New Babylon” would seem like a clear signal of evil intent — why else would he choose a name synonymous with oppression? But no one seems to take this name seriously. Even the Rastafarians are apparently on board in support of “New Babylon” — seeming to put all the emphasis on the “new” and very little on the “Babylon.” Nicolae doesn’t seem like he’s in Nebuchadnezzar’s league either.

It’s hard for me to think of any cruel tyrant from history who doesn’t seem far worse than this supposed apotheosis of evil. Just tick through a list of 20th-century villains — there’s no way this guy could crack the top 50, let alone vie for the title of history’s greatest monster.

The villain Nicolae Carpathia probably reminds of more than any other is Chairface Chippendale, from one of my favorite episodes of The Tick — a warped parody of superhero comics. Chairface, a supervillain, constructs a giant heat ray he plans to use to carve his name on the moon. Our heroes, of course, rush to stop him, but the Tick struggles to make sense of this grandly strange act of supervillainy, asking his sidekick, Arthur, if carving your name on the moon is even illegal.

“It’s just wrong,” Arthur says, and he’s surely right about that. Defacing the moon would be an act of planetary vandalism. (Just think of it in Kantian terms — what if everyone built a giant heat ray to carve their names on the moon?) But the Tick’s confusion was understandable, too. Chairface’s scheme was surely, in some sense, evil, but in an oddly non-predatory, non-cruel way.

It was good that the heroes stopped him (if not quite in time — for the rest of the series the first three letters, “CHA,” could be seen whenever the moon rose over The City), but if Chairface had succeeded in his evil plan it wouldn’t have been the end of the world.

Much of Nicolae’s master plan seems similar to the oddball supervillainy of Chairface Chippendale. It’s more like some annoying brand of global performance art than any recognizable form of tyranny.

One world language? Why? And also, how? Seriously, how is he supposed to pull that off in less than seven years? And how is it possible to imagine, let alone accept, that this would be an overwhelmingly popular plan? Repressive regimes have sometimes outlawed minority languages as a kind of linguistic imperialism or as part of their ethnic cleansing efforts, but ethnic cleansing — a hallmark of cruel tyrants for millennia — seems beyond the scope of Nicolae’s oddball evil.

And that, again, is my point here. Tim LaHaye and Jerry Jenkins’ Antichrist just doesn’t seem nearly as menacing or evil as the dozens of thuggish rulers who were fixtures in the news when these books were written. The 1990s were marked by the rise of nasty post-Cold War conflicts reasserting themselves all over the globe and in every one of those there was one or more beastly leaders who were more vicious, brutal and evil than the supposedly ultimate evil portrayed in these books. Nicolae Carpathia doesn’t just represent a failure of imagination, he represents a failure to pay attention to current events.

The authors’ inability to understand and portray a convincing Antichrist is also closely linked to their inability to understand a convincing Christ. That’s a product of their theology. Premillennial dispensationalism dispenses with Jesus’ life and teachings — relegating one to the irrelevant past and the other to the irrelevant future. And it regards Jesus’ death and resurrection — what most Christians consider, in Paul’s word, his essential and central “victory” — as the failure of God’s Plan A, requiring the correction of Plan B when Jesus will return in his second and third comings to remedy the problem by force.

In other words, what other Christians regard as a once-and-for-all showdown between love and power at Calvary, PMDs view as a Round 1 loss to be made up for in Round 2, when power gets defeated not by love, but by an even greater power. That suggests a moral universe in which the most important difference between good and evil is simply that good is stronger.

Such a view is bound to create an odd archvillain, as it does here. Nicolae is meant to be a tyrant, but the authors don’t really have a problem with tyranny per se — they’re awaiting the triumphant totalitarian reign of Jesus in the Millennium. Nicolae’s proposed New Age Talibanism is portrayed as evil not because totalitarianism and Talibanism are wrong in themselves, but because they’re reserved for the divine dictatorship of the coming age.

Anyway, this longish tangent results from the passage we’re encountering next in Chapter 13 of Tribulation Force, which also seems like a longish tangent until you realize that it isn’t meant as a tangent at all. What we find here in this seemingly trivial discussion between Rayford and Hattie is intended to be a glimpse into the central priorities of L&J’s Antichrist. Those priorities — the essence of his evil plans — are these: manipulating Rayford to work for him and shrewdly conspiring to have Air Force One repainted with his own logo.

It’s not quite carving your name on the moon with a giant heat ray, but it’s close.

Hattie finally explains Nicolae’s diabolical anonymous-flowers plan — an explanation that makes little sense — and she lays out for Rayford the Antichrist’s theory of global domination through executive aircraft. We’ll get to all that in more detail next week when we look at their conversation more closely, but for now I just want to focus on one exchange.

Rayford, a member of a secret guerrilla force sworn to oppose the Antichrist, has arranged this private meeting with Hattie Durham, the Antichrist’s Girl Friday and closest personal assistant. This is a golden opportunity for Rayford and the Tribulation Force to find out all they can about Nicolae’s plans, so he’s determined to make the most of it:

“Hattie, I want you to tell me about the flowers and candy.”

He bullies her into admitting she sent them on Nicolae’s behalf and Rayford, who’s meant to be viewed as the smart one in this conversation, interprets this to mean that Nicolae is “pursuing” Chloe romantically. Hattie quickly corrects this misimpression:

“He’s not pursuing her, Rayford! He’s seeing someone.”

“What does that mean?”

“He has a relationship.”

“Anybody we know?” Rayford gave her a disgusted look.

Hattie seemed to be fighting a grin. “It’s safe to say we’re an item …”

Here is further evidence that Nicolae just simply is not the Most Evil Person Ever. He’s not even the worst guy Hattie’s dated this year. Just look at Rayford, yet again, berating her and constantly expressing his “disgust.” Contrast that with her new beau who, so far, seems to be a stand-up guy. He’s given her confidence and treats her with respect. She seems happier than she has been in a long time.

I suppose we’re meant to regard Hattie as a “fallen woman” now due to her implied sexual relationship with Nicolae. I think the authors expect us to recoil from this — ZOMG! sin! — and to regard it as a sign of Nicolae’s ultimate evilness. But it seems a bit of a leap, even following the strictest and most conservative Christian sexual ethics, to consider a single woman and a single man in an apparently committed, monogamous relationship as the worst evil imaginable. It’s nowhere near as beastly as I would have expected the Antichrist’s personal life to be. I would have guessed the Antichrist to be a cruel, predatory user of women — physically and emotionally abusive, manipulative, unfaithful, using his mind-mojo like roofies in pursuit of debasing debaucheries that would have made Caligula blush with shame.

Instead he seems, well, caring. He’s apparently the kind of man for whom it would be unthinkable to pursue another woman when he’s in a “relationship.” And he rescued Hattie from something much worse — from a cruel, emotionally abusive pseudo-relationship with a contemptuous and self-righteously manipulative married man. By all accounts, Nicolae is treating Hattie with more love and respect than Rayford ever showed her. He’s treating Hattie better, in fact, than Rayford ever treated Irene.

I know several people who have an ex they refer to as “The Antichrist” and I’ve seen or heard the reasons these exes have earned that nickname. All of those real-world people seem more evil to me than Nicolae Carpathia does so far.

Later on in the series, when Nicolae transforms into more of a cackling, mustache-twirling fiend — bombing cities and fisting pigs and such — Hattie’s situation becomes much worse. If the authors had been at all interested in things like themes or metaphors, her relationship with Nicolae could have served as an illustration of evil’s seductive charm — at first innocently attractive, then corrupting and enslaving. But that would have involved portraying Hattie — and by extension all others deceived by the Antichrist — as a reasonable and responsible human being with whom we could sympathize. It would have meant trying to understand why the lure of this man seemed attractive, why he made such a convincing and persuasive-seeming counterfeit Messiah.

But as much as LaHaye & Jenkins like to pretend that they’re interested in warning against such deception and seduction, that’s not really what they’re about. They’re not saying, “Dear Reader, don’t be left behind and don’t be drawn in by the deceptions of the coming Antichrist.” Their real message, instead, is that those left behind to tribulation and damnation are, like Hattie, dirty, dirty whores who deserve what’s coming to them.

This is why I find it hard to believe the authors’ claims that these books are meant to be evangelistic. When your main method of evangelism is slut-shaming, I can’t believe you’re really interested in sharing the good news of salvation.

Contrast L&J’s contempt for Hattie with the far more human and sympathetic portrayal of “Patty Myers,” the hero of Donald W. Thompson’s classic low-budget 1970s Rapture movies (starting with A Thief in the Night).

Thompson cared about Patty and he wanted his audience to care about Patty — both as an individual and as a representative of all those who he believed were soon to suffer under the reign of the Antichrist. Thompson wanted Patty and all those others to be saved — in every sense. Like L&J, Thompson was a propagandist of heresies and a promoter of abominably antibiblical theology. But unlike L&J he didn’t also come across as a sociopath.

Left Behind

Previous Post

November 2, 2015

T.F.: The Logic of Hell

Next Post

November 3, 2015 Smart people saying smart things (11.3)

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category class warfare evangelicals Iraq Left Behind Mammon music Uncategorized

Select a Month October 2026 September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 June 2026 May 2026 April 2026 March 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 September 2025 August 2025 July 2025 June 2025 May 2025 April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 June 2023 May 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 October 2021 September 2021 August 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

Who said, "Let us build us a city and a tower, whose top may reach unto heaven"?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Chaldeans Egyptians People of Babel Israelites