It doesn't get a lot of play, because it's kind of obtuse, but he has extremely strong beliefs; they're just ones that don't preclude him saying this stuff to fool investors. There were a few pieces that have been written about it, and they flared up again after his weird antichrist lectures last year.

The article hints at it it, but basically, he subscribes/contributes to an extreme variant of an obscure religion-adjacent philosophy that posits that the social stability benefits of an authoritarian Christian monoculture, preferably over the whole world due to some quirks of Christian theology, but certainly at least in the parts of the world where Christianity is a majority religion, are so amazing that they're worth pretending that it's all actually factually true, and that a surveillance state to preserve harmony (and, surprise side effect, it also locks in the power of the elites who establish it all!) is completely acceptable. Theoretically the Christianity part is optional, but there is a lot of risk inherent in not relying on the historical social glue.

To him, seeking this is for the good of humankind. Anything that opposes any of it with any sort of sway, and especially from a Christian context, can be fairly called an antichrist. It's some serious Leto II God Emperor of Dune shit.