Did Donald Trump explicitly say 'to go against me is to go against God' and when was it said?

1. What the available reporting actually documents

Contemporary reporting shows Trump using God-language about political rivals and himself: the BBC reported Trump saying his 2020 opponent Joe Biden was "against God" during the 2020 campaign ^[1], and later coverage collected by outlets noted Trump declaring he was "saved by God" and using messianic framing in 2025 ^[2]; religion-focused coverage of inaugural remarks likewise highlighted prominent, personal references to God in his rhetoric ^[3]. These citations establish a pattern of religious framing in his public remarks, but none of the supplied sources quote the exact line "to go against me is to go against God" verbatim ^{[1] [2] [3]}.

2. Closest statements and their contexts

The closest documented examples in these sources are accusatory or self-exalting religious claims rather than the exact phrase in question: the BBC recounts Trump telling voters his opponent was "against God" as part of campaign rhetoric ^[1], Reuters and other compilations documented 2025 remarks where Trump said he was "saved by God" and used messianic themes ^[2], and religion coverage of his inauguration noted how God figured prominently and personally in his speech ^[3]. Those instances show Trump aligning political loyalties with religious identity or divine favor, which can be read as functionally similar to the claim alleged, but the supplied reporting stops short of printing the precise sentence the question asks about ^{[1] [2] [3]}.

3. What the sources do not provide — limits of the record

The set of articles and snippets provided does not include any primary source transcript, video clip, or verbatim quotation that matches "to go against me is to go against God" word-for-word, nor do the excerpts attribute that specific construction to a particular date or event ^{[4] [3] [1] [2]}. Because the supplied reporting documents related religious rhetoric but lacks the exact phrasing or a unique citation, it is not possible on this evidence to assert that Trump explicitly uttered that sentence at a specific time; absence of that precise quote in these materials is a limitation of the reporting, not proof that it was never said elsewhere ^{[4] [3]}.

4. Why exact wording and sourcing matter here

Political and religious language often gets paraphrased, amplified, or reframed by supporters, critics and secondary outlets, and the difference between "he said opponents are against God" and "he said to go against me is to go against God" matters legally, rhetorically and for historical record-keeping; the supplied sources show documented uses of the former formulation but do not produce the latter verbatim ^{[1] [2]}. Given the ambiguity introduced by paraphrase and the potent implications of a direct theocratic claim, rigorous confirmation requires a primary-source audio, video, or reliable transcript that contains the exact words and timestamp — material not present in the provided set ^{[3] [4]}.

5. Alternative explanations and agendas in the reporting

Some outlets collected examples to argue Trump is cultivating a messianic image or courting Christian nationalist support ^{[3] [2]}, while critics and faith-based commentators interpret his rhetoric as blasphemous or at odds with biblical teachings ^{[5] [6]}; those editorial framings show competing agendas — either to document a pattern of God-language for political effect or to condemn that pattern outright — and the provided pieces reflect both documentary reporting and opinionated takes ^{[3] [5] [6]}. Readers should therefore treat summaries that attribute the precise sentence named in the question with caution unless they point to a primary-source citation.