Is the Antichrist's sexual orientation homosexual?

Definition of the Term “Antichrist”

In Scripture, the term “Antichrist” typically appears in the letters of John, where it designates both an individual figure and a spirit of opposition against the Messiah (1 John 2:18–22; 1 John 4:3; 2 John 1:7). This figure is anticipated to play a central role in the end times, setting himself against Christ and deceiving many (cf. 2 Thessalonians 2:3–4). Despite a variety of interpretations over history, key passages in Daniel, the New Testament epistles, and Revelation form the basis for understanding this anticipated individual.

Biblical Context and Alleged Sexual Orientation

A frequent question arises regarding Daniel 11:37, where the prophecy about a ruler who “will show no regard for the gods of his fathers, nor for the desire of women” is sometimes interpreted to suggest homosexuality. The relevant phrase emerges in the context of a king exalting himself above all divine and earthly powers. Some translations read “the one desired by women,” while others (including older translations) state he “shall not regard the desire of women.” Because the text is somewhat concise, it has served as a springboard for debate.

Historical Interpretations of Daniel 11:37

1. Literal Reference to Disinterest in Women

Some interpreters have concluded that the phrase indicates the future ruler’s lack of desire for women romantically, implying a homosexual orientation. Those who adopt this view cite the phrase “nor for the desire of women” as meaning an overt rejection of traditional male-female relationships.

2. Symbolic or Messianic Reference

Others hold that “the desire of women” refers to the Messiah, understood as the one women in Israel hoped to bring forth. In this reading, the ruler’s rejection of the “desire of women” is an emblem of his rejection of the Messiah or disregard for any deity or authority other than himself. Early Jewish understanding often associated the long-awaited Redeemer with the ultimate hope of mothers in Israel (cf. genealogical hopes in Ruth 4:14–17 and the messianic lineage in Isaiah 7:14).

3. Political and Religious Focus

Many commentators emphasize the broader context in Daniel 11. The prophecy focuses heavily on political power struggles, conquests, and the ruler’s self-exaltation over all gods. In this larger framework, the phrase about “the desire of women” might highlight total disregard for normal social, familial, or religious traditions.

Analysis of Primary Bible Passages

1. Daniel 11:37: “He will show no regard for the gods of his fathers, nor for the desire of women. Nor will he show regard for any god, because he will magnify himself above all.”

2. 2 Thessalonians 2:3–4: “Let no one deceive you in any way, for that day will not come until the rebellion occurs and the man of lawlessness—the son of destruction—is revealed. He will oppose and exalt himself above every so-called god or object of worship. So he will seat himself in the temple of God, proclaiming himself to be God.”

3. 1 John 2:18: “Children, it is the last hour; and just as you have heard that the antichrist is coming, so now many antichrists have appeared. This is how we know it is the last hour.”

None of these passages explicitly defines the Antichrist’s sexual orientation. Instead, they emphasize rebellion, blasphemy, self-aggrandizement, and deception as defining traits.

Textual and Linguistic Considerations

The Hebrew phrase often rendered “desire of women” uses a term (Hebrew: חֶמְדַּת, chemdat) that can connote “delight,” “desire,” or “precious thing.” Multiple Jewish and Christian commentators throughout history have associated this phrase with the longing of Israelite women to give birth to the Messiah. Others argue it is an idiom expressing a straightforward concept—an individual uninterested in customary relationships or affections. Textual scholars note that Daniel 11 overall depicts a king dismissive of every standard of worship, human custom, or deity. Thus, the context does not require a connotation of homosexuality. It could simply underscore the king’s self-consumed nature, having no regard for any normal human attachments or loyalties.

Evidence from Church History and Exegetical Tradition

• Several early church teachers suggested that this reference has nothing to do with orientation but with utter ruthlessness and pride.

• Medieval Jewish commentary also focused on the notion of the “desire of women” being the Messiah, a view found in some Talmudic interpretations.

• In Reformation and post-Reformation commentaries, emphasis remained upon the Antichrist’s exaltation of himself above any commonly acknowledged desire or deity.

Comparative Analysis with Other Scriptural Figures

In Revelation 13, the beast is driven by power, great authority, and blasphemous speech. Nowhere is a sexual inclination singled out. Similarly, 2 Thessalonians 2 addresses his self-glorification and deception, not personal attractions. Throughout Scripture, rulers who embody evil are typically condemned for idolatry, cruelty, blasphemy, and persecuting God’s people rather than for any explicit sexual orientation.

The Core Issue: Rebellion and Self-Exaltation

The overarching scriptural portrayal is that this figure’s central trait is to elevate himself above all that is called God. While the question of sexual orientation sometimes arises, the Bible’s key emphasis rests on his insatiable desire for worship, demand for absolute allegiance, and persecution of believers. Scripture suggests that his moral stance, including any personal relationships, stands under a much broader condemnation of repudiating God’s design and exalting himself in place of God.

Conclusion

No scriptural passage definitively states the Antichrist’s sexual orientation. While Daniel 11:37’s phrase “the desire of women” has historically sparked some debate, the overarching biblical theme underscores the Antichrist’s godlessness, pride, and fierce opposition to all true worship. At best, the reference to “the desire of women” is ambiguous and surrounded by varied interpretations in Jewish and Christian thought. Taken on face value, the text is highlighting his singular obsession with power and disregard for conventional devotion—whether to gods, traditions, or normal human attachments.

In the final analysis, Scripture’s central warning about the Antichrist is not about his personal desires but about his rebellion against God and his deceptive role in leading many astray. This emerges consistently in Daniel, 2 Thessalonians, and Revelation: the Antichrist’s defining feature is not a particular orientation but a potent, final, and idolatrous challenge to divine authority.