By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Following the deletion of an image depicting him as Jesus Christ, the individual in question claimed to have mistakenly believed it showed him as a doctor supporting the Red Cross. This assertion was met with widespread criticism, with various right-wing figures, including evangelical Christians and media personalities, decrying the post as blasphemous. Many called for the image to be immediately removed and for an apology to be issued.
Read the original article here
It seems former President Donald Trump recently posted a rather provocative image to his social media, depicting himself with a Christ-like aura, only to later delete it and offer an explanation that’s being widely met with skepticism, to put it mildly. The image, which showed Trump bathed in a divine glow and appearing to perform a healing, quickly sparked conversation, and not in a way that most would consider flattering.
Following the online stir, Trump himself weighed in, claiming he believed the image was of him as a doctor, perhaps working with the Red Cross, an organization he stated he supports. He then, predictably, attributed the uproar and misinterpretation to “fake news,” a familiar refrain in his public discourse. This explanation, however, has struck many as incredibly disingenuous, if not outright absurd.
The sheer implausibility of the excuse has led to widespread commentary suggesting a need for both a cognitive and an ophthalmological evaluation. The argument goes that if one genuinely believes an image depicting someone with a halo, divine light, and a pose reminiscent of religious iconography is simply a doctor, or a Red Cross worker, it points to a profound disconnect from reality. Some have even gone as far as to equate this perceived denial and misrepresentation with biblical prophecies, though such interpretations are, of course, highly subjective.
It’s not just the claim of mistaking a divine depiction for a medical professional that’s raising eyebrows. The accompanying statement that “only the fake news could come up with that one” feels like a preemptive strike, an attempt to discredit any criticism before it’s fully formed. This tactic suggests an awareness that the imagery was indeed problematic, but rather than issuing a clear apology or a more plausible retraction, a convoluted and unbelievable excuse is offered.
The idea that Trump genuinely mistook the image for himself as a doctor engaged with the Red Cross is hard to swallow. The visual cues in the original post were, for many, overwhelmingly spiritual or even divine. The glowing halo, the posture, the overall composition – these elements are deeply ingrained in common depictions of Jesus Christ. To then claim a simple mix-up with a Red Cross uniform requires a leap of faith that few are willing to make, especially given the context of Trump’s public persona and past statements.
Furthermore, the excuse seems to conveniently allow his supporters to dismiss any criticism. By framing the issue as a “fake news” fabrication, his loyal followers can now feel vindicated in their defense, arguing that the outrage was based on a misunderstanding manufactured by the media. This strategy, for some observers, appears to be a calculated move: post something controversial, gauge the reaction, and then deploy a “plausible deniability” defense that shields both himself and his base from acknowledging any lapse in judgment or potential blasphemy.
The narrative being pushed is one of manufactured innocence, a plea of ignorance that strains credulity. It’s an attempt to reframe the situation not as a deliberate or even accidental invocation of religious imagery for political gain, but as a simple, unfortunate misidentification, amplified by a hostile media. This kind of response, where a clear visual is explained away with a convoluted and unlikely scenario, often comes across as more insulting than the original act.
The act of deleting the photo, followed by this weak excuse, suggests that the backlash, particularly from within his own supporter base or perhaps from religious groups he courted, was significant enough to warrant a retraction. However, the chosen method of retraction appears to be less about genuine remorse or clarification and more about damage control through an obviously fabricated narrative. It’s a move that, for many, only serves to highlight the perceived dishonesty and lack of self-awareness.
The situation also brings up the broader question of how such imagery is perceived and utilized in political discourse. When a public figure, especially one who has courted the evangelical vote, uses imagery that so closely resembles religious icons, it’s bound to generate strong reactions. The attempt to then backtrack with an excuse that suggests an almost childlike inability to discern context or meaning only adds another layer to the controversy, leaving many to question not just the initial post, but the sincerity of the subsequent explanation.
Ultimately, the incident and the ensuing excuse have become a talking point that reinforces existing perceptions for many. For critics, it’s further evidence of Trump’s pattern of controversial behavior followed by evasive or unbelievable explanations. For his supporters, it may be another instance of the “fake news” media attacking their leader. Regardless of which camp one falls into, the spectacle of a former president deleting a “Jesus-like” photo of himself and then offering a remarkably flimsy excuse has certainly provided ample fodder for discussion and debate.