A Biblical Study of Sovereignty, Character, and the Choices Christians Face
Key Scriptures
Daniel 2:20–21
Proverbs 21:1
Romans 13:1–7
1 Timothy 2:1–4
The Bible is honest about the people God uses. It does not hide their weaknesses, soften their failures, or revise their stories to make them easier for us to admire. Abraham acted out of fear. Moses lost his temper. David committed adultery and arranged the death of an innocent man. Samson repeatedly surrendered to his desires. Peter denied the Lord, and Paul once persecuted the church. These accounts are not included so that we will become comfortable with sin. They are included so that we will understand the grace and sovereignty of God.
Daniel learned this truth while living far from Jerusalem under the authority of a pagan empire. Babylon had conquered Judah, destroyed the temple, and carried many of the people into captivity. From a human point of view, it may have appeared that the gods of Babylon had triumphed over the God of Israel, but Daniel knew better. Nebuchadnezzar sat upon Babylon’s throne, while the Lord remained upon the throne of heaven.
Daniel praised God as the One who “changes the times and the seasons; He removes kings and raises up kings” (Daniel 2:21). Proverbs gives us a similar picture when it says, “The king’s heart is in the hand of the LORD, like the rivers of water; He turns it wherever He wishes” (Proverbs 21:1). No ruler is beyond God’s authority. No election surprises Him, and no government operates outside His knowledge. A leader may believe he rose to power through his own wisdom, strength, influence, or popularity, but he remains under the authority of God.
That does not mean God approves of everything a leader says or does. God’s use of a person is not the same as His approval of that person. He may accomplish His purposes through someone whose character is deeply flawed, direct the decisions of a ruler who does not know Him, or use a proud and hostile nation before holding that nation accountable for the manner in which it acted. God’s sovereignty never makes evil good, and human sin never places His purposes in jeopardy.
Cyrus Did Not Know God
Isaiah’s prophecy concerning Cyrus is one of the clearest examples of God using a ruler who did not share the faith of His people. Judah would be carried into captivity because of years of idolatry and rebellion. The exile was an act of divine judgment, but it would not last forever. God promised to bring His people home, restore Jerusalem, and allow the temple to be rebuilt. The ruler He chose for that task was Cyrus, king of Persia.
The Lord said of him, “He is My shepherd, and he shall perform all My pleasure” (Isaiah 44:28). In the following chapter, God called Cyrus “His anointed” and promised to open doors before him and give nations into his hand (Isaiah 45:1). Those titles are striking because Cyrus was not a king of Israel. He did not belong to the covenant people, nor did he worship the Lord as Israel did. God said plainly, “I have named you, though you have not known Me” (Isaiah 45:4).
Cyrus was called God’s shepherd because God appointed him to perform a particular task. He was called God’s anointed because he had been set apart for that purpose. The titles did not mean that Cyrus possessed saving faith or that everything he believed and did was pleasing to God. God used him to release the Jewish exiles and permit the rebuilding of the temple. Cyrus may not have understood the full significance of his decision, but God did.
The Lord is not limited to working through people who know Him. He can direct an unbelieving ruler to make decisions that protect His people or advance His purposes. A leader does not have to understand everything God is doing in order to be used by Him. Israel, however, was never told to look to Cyrus for spiritual guidance. He fulfilled a political role in God’s plan, but he was not the shepherd of Israel’s soul.
That distinction still matters. We may recognize that God has worked through the decisions of a political leader without treating that leader as a spiritual authority. We may be grateful for a policy that accomplishes something good without assuming that God approves of every part of that leader’s character.
David Misused His Power
David is often described as a man after God’s own heart, but that description does not mean he was without sin. Second Samuel 11 records one of the darkest chapters of his life. David saw Bathsheba bathing and sent messengers to bring her to him. She was the wife of Uriah, one of David’s own fighting men. When Bathsheba became pregnant, David attempted to conceal what he had done. He brought Uriah home from battle, hoping he would spend the night with his wife, but Uriah refused to enjoy the comforts of home while his fellow soldiers remained in the field.
David then sent Uriah back to battle carrying the instructions for his own death. Uriah was placed where the fighting was fiercest and abandoned there. David’s sin involved sexual wrongdoing, deception, abuse of authority, and murder. Bathsheba did not possess the power David possessed. He was the king, and he used his position to take what he desired. When consequences followed, he used that same authority to conceal his actions.
The Lord did not overlook David’s conduct because he had once defeated Goliath, written psalms, or led Israel faithfully. God sent Nathan the prophet to confront him. Nathan told David about a wealthy man who took the only lamb belonging to a poor man. David became angry and pronounced judgment upon the offender, and Nathan replied, “You are the man” (2 Samuel 12:7).
David answered, “I have sinned against the LORD” (2 Samuel 12:13). Psalm 51 allows us to hear more of his confession. He did not speak only of the damage to his reputation or the consequences he feared. He acknowledged that the corruption was within his own heart and prayed, “Create in me a clean heart, O God, and renew a steadfast spirit within me” (Psalm 51:10).
God forgave David, but forgiveness did not make his actions harmless. His family was wounded, his household became troubled, and the consequences continued through the remainder of his reign. David’s story shows us the mercy of God toward those who repent, but it should never be used to make a leader’s sin seem unimportant. The account includes wrongdoing, exposure, confrontation, confession, forgiveness, and painful consequences.
When a present-day leader is compared to David, we should not look only at David’s failure. We should also consider his response when Nathan brought the truth before him. Could he receive correction? Would he acknowledge what he had done? Did he blame others, attack the prophet, or dismiss the accusation as the work of an enemy? David said, “I have sinned.”
Every leader is a sinner, but not every leader responds to sin in the same way. David’s life does not teach us to excuse wrongdoing in powerful people. It teaches us that powerful people must be confronted with truth and that the proper response to sin is repentance.
Samson Did Not Govern His Desires
Samson was set apart before his birth. The angel of the Lord told his mother that he would “begin to deliver Israel out of the hand of the Philistines” (Judges 13:5). The Spirit of the Lord came upon him, and God gave him extraordinary physical strength. Yet the man who could overpower a lion and defeat an army often seemed unable to govern his own desires.
Samson was especially vulnerable in his relationships with women. The women were not responsible for his failure. The problem was within Samson himself. He repeatedly allowed attraction and sexual desire to overrule wisdom, obedience, and the calling God had placed upon his life. When his parents questioned his desire to marry a Philistine woman, Samson answered, “Get her for me, for she pleases me well” (Judges 14:3). His concern was not whether the relationship honored God or whether the decision was wise. He wanted what pleased him.
That pattern continued. Samson went to a prostitute in Gaza and later became involved with Delilah. His desires drew him into danger, but he continued to believe he could escape the consequences as he had before. Delilah did not create Samson’s weakness. She exposed what had governed him for years.
God still worked through Samson, but Samson’s usefulness did not make his conduct acceptable. His lack of self-control eventually led to betrayal, blindness, humiliation, and imprisonment. His life warns us not to confuse strength with character. A man may possess courage, influence, intelligence, and unusual leadership ability while remaining weak in the places where he refuses to submit himself to God. Public accomplishment does not prove private faithfulness, and visible success is not evidence that every method or desire has God’s approval.
David was no less guilty than Samson. In some ways, David’s sin was even more grievous because he used the authority of the throne to satisfy his desire and conceal what he had done. Samson shows us the danger of unrestrained appetite. David shows us what can happen when unrestrained appetite is joined to great power. Neither man gives us permission to dismiss sexual wrongdoing as though it were unrelated to leadership.
Paul Was Changed
Before Paul proclaimed Christ, he persecuted those who followed Him. He approved of Stephen’s death, entered homes, arrested believers, and committed them to prison. Paul was not simply unfamiliar with Christianity. He was actively attempting to destroy the church.
While traveling to Damascus with authority to arrest more believers, he was confronted by the risen Christ. “Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting Me?” Jesus asked (Acts 9:4). That encounter changed the direction of Paul’s life. The man who had entered cities to arrest Christians later entered cities to preach Christ. The one who had tried to silence the gospel became willing to suffer for it.
Paul never pretended that his past had not happened. He described himself as one who had formerly been “a blasphemer, a persecutor, and an insolent man” (1 Timothy 1:13). He remembered what he had been, but he also understood the mercy he had received.
Paul’s story is different from that of Cyrus. God used Cyrus while Cyrus did not know Him. Paul was confronted, converted, and changed before being sent to carry the gospel to the nations. His life reminds us that no opponent of Christ is beyond the reach of grace. We should pray for the salvation of leaders who do not know Him rather than assuming they are beyond redemption.
Paul also shows us that genuine conversion produces a changed direction. He did not continue persecuting believers while claiming that God had chosen him. The grace of Christ changed his beliefs, his conduct, his relationships, and the purpose of his life. Grace receives us as we are, but it does not leave us as we were.
Nebuchadnezzar Was Humbled
Nebuchadnezzar was king of Babylon. His armies conquered Jerusalem, destroyed the temple, and carried many of Judah’s people into exile. Jeremiah referred to Nebuchadnezzar as God’s servant because God used Babylon to bring judgment upon Judah for its persistent rebellion (Jeremiah 27:6). This did not mean Nebuchadnezzar was righteous. He was a pagan ruler who worshiped idols and exercised enormous power. God used him, but God did not approve of his pride or cruelty.
Daniel repeatedly told Nebuchadnezzar that his kingdom had been given to him by the God of heaven. Still, the king looked over Babylon and declared, “Is not this great Babylon, that I have built for a royal dwelling by my mighty power and for the honor of my majesty?” (Daniel 4:30). While the words were still in his mouth, judgment came. Nebuchadnezzar was removed from his position and humbled until he acknowledged “that the Most High rules in the kingdom of men, and gives it to whomever He chooses” (Daniel 4:32).
Nebuchadnezzar had to learn that he was not the source of his own authority. This truth applies to every leader. A ruler may win an election, inherit a throne, command an army, or exercise enormous influence, but authority is always held for a time and under the watchful eye of God.
The Lord may use a ruler to restrain one evil and later hold him accountable for another. He may accomplish a purpose through a nation and then judge that nation for the pride or cruelty with which it acted. The fact that God uses a leader does not place that leader beyond judgment.
Romans 13 and the Purpose of Government
Paul writes that “there is no authority except from God, and the authorities that exist are appointed by God” (Romans 13:1). He describes the ruler as “God’s minister to you for good” and as one who does not bear the sword in vain against those who practice evil (Romans 13:4). Government has been given a real and necessary responsibility. It is intended to maintain order, restrain wrongdoing, protect the innocent, and administer justice.
Paul wrote these words while believers lived under the Roman Empire. Rome did not worship Christ, and its rulers did not always act justly. Romans 13 cannot mean that every government decision is good simply because a government made it. The passage teaches what governing authority is meant to do. When government restrains evil and protects what is good, it is carrying out its God-given responsibility. When it rewards evil, punishes good, or misuses its power, it acts contrary to that responsibility.
The rest of Scripture helps us understand the limits of submission. The Hebrew midwives refused Pharaoh’s command to kill Israelite children because they feared God. Daniel continued praying when the law forbade him to do so. Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-Nego would not bow before Nebuchadnezzar’s image. When the apostles were ordered to stop preaching Christ, Peter answered, “We ought to obey God rather than men” (Acts 5:29).
These believers did not treat all authority with contempt. They obeyed until obedience to government required disobedience to God. Christians are called to respect the proper role of government, obey the law, pay what is owed, and pray for those in authority. Yet no president, king, court, or government possesses the authority that belongs to God alone. Nathan confronted David. Elijah confronted Ahab. Daniel spoke truth to Nebuchadnezzar, and John the Baptist confronted Herod. Respect for authority did not silence them when those in power sinned.
Why This Question Is Personal to Me
This is not merely a political or theological question for me. I am a survivor of sexual abuse, and I know that sexual wrongdoing cannot be discussed as though it were a minor weakness or an unfortunate detail in someone’s past. It leaves wounds that may remain long after the abuse itself has ended. For that reason, the conduct of a leader toward women matters to me.
I also voted for Donald Trump. I did not vote for him because I believed his moral character should be defended or imitated. I voted according to issues I believed carried serious moral consequences, including the protection of unborn life, the biblical meaning of marriage, and the growing confusion surrounding biological sex and gender. My vote reflected the choice I believed I had to make between the candidates, policies, and likely consequences before me. It was not an endorsement of everything President Trump has said or done.
At the time of this writing, Donald Trump is serving as the forty-seventh president of the United States. A federal civil jury found him liable for sexually abusing and defaming E. Jean Carroll. He has denied her allegation, but the judgment was affirmed on appeal, and the full United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit later declined to rehear the case. I cannot dismiss that simply because I voted for him, nor do I believe my vote requires me to defend his conduct. Supporting a candidate in an election does not mean declaring that his moral life is acceptable. A vote is not an ordination, and it is not a profession of faith in the person receiving it.
I voted for policies I believed would better protect unborn children, uphold the biblical understanding of marriage, and address questions of sex and gender in a way more consistent with my convictions. Another Christian may have considered President Trump’s character and conduct toward women and concluded that she could not vote for him. That is the tension this study is attempting to address.
Beth Moore Reached a Different Conclusion
Beth Moore has also spoken publicly about surviving sexual abuse. I have long loved and appreciated her biblical teaching, her love for the Word of God, and the warmth and honesty with which she encourages women to know Christ more deeply. Her ministry has blessed many women, including me, and my respect for her is not diminished because we reached different conclusions about a political decision.
When Donald Trump rose to political prominence, Beth Moore became deeply troubled by his conduct toward women and by the willingness of some evangelical leaders to present him as a champion of the Christian faith. Her departure from the Southern Baptist Convention in 2021 did not grow from one concern alone. It was connected to the response she received after criticizing President Trump, the denomination’s handling of sexual abuse, its treatment of women in ministry, and what she believed had become an unhealthy mixture of the gospel, nationalism, and partisan politics.
Beth Moore and I share some important things. We are women who love Christ and His Word. We both know the wounds sexual abuse can leave, and we both care about unborn life. Beth Moore has described herself as pro-life, yet she could not accept the way many evangelicals elevated President Trump despite his conduct toward women. I voted for him because I believed his positions on abortion, marriage, and questions of sex and gender carried greater weight in the choice before me.
Her decision does not make my experience less real, and my decision does not make hers less real. Two Christian women who have survived sexual abuse may look at the same candidate, pray sincerely, seek to honor Scripture, and still reach different conclusions. One may decide that the candidate’s character and conduct make support impossible. Another may decide that the policies of the opposing candidate would cause greater harm in areas she believes Scripture requires her to protect. We should be slow to question one another’s faith or devotion to Christ because we weighed a difficult political choice differently.
There is also an important difference between voting for an imperfect candidate and presenting that candidate as a model of Christian character. Beth Moore’s concern was not merely that Christians voted for President Trump. She was troubled that many appeared to give him a spiritual standing no political leader should possess and treated criticism of him as betrayal. On that concern, I believe we should listen carefully.
We may decide that one candidate represents the wiser political choice without defending his every statement, overlooking his sin, or treating him as though he were the protector of Christ’s church. Jesus Christ alone is the Head and keeper of His church.
Does Voting Mean Approval?
The question beneath much of this discussion is whether voting for a leader means approving of him. I do not believe it necessarily does. Voting often requires us to choose among imperfect candidates in an imperfect political system. We consider policies, character, competence, the people who will be appointed, the laws that may be enacted, and the consequences likely to follow. Christians may weigh those matters differently.
One believer may place greater weight upon the protection of unborn life. Another may place greater weight upon a candidate’s character, treatment of women, immigration policies, concern for the poor, or use of authority. Both may be attempting to act according to conscience, even though they reach different conclusions.
That does not mean every political choice is equally wise or that policy and character can be separated completely. Character affects the way power is used. Pride makes correction difficult. Dishonesty spreads confusion. Anger encourages retaliation, and a lack of self-control eventually touches more lives than the leader’s own. Policies matter, and character matters. Christians do not honor Scripture by pretending one of those truths cancels the other.
I can say that I voted for President Trump because of his positions on topics that align with my faith. I can also say that his conduct toward women troubles me and should not be excused. Those statements are not contradictory. They reflect the difficulty of making political choices in a fallen world.
We Must Use the Same Standard
One of the greatest dangers in political life is our tendency to apply one moral standard to the leaders we oppose and another to those we support. If dishonesty is wrong when practiced by a Democrat, it remains wrong when practiced by a Republican. If sexual wrongdoing mattered when Bill Clinton occupied the White House, it still matters when Donald Trump occupies it. If abuse of authority troubles us in one administration, it should trouble us in another. The Word of God does not change with the occupant of the White House.
Proverbs says, “It is an abomination for kings to commit wickedness, for a throne is established by righteousness” (Proverbs 16:12). It also warns, “If a ruler pays attention to lies, all his servants become wicked” (Proverbs 29:12). A leader’s usefulness does not erase his accountability. Samson’s victories did not make his lack of self-control righteous. David’s success as king did not make his actions toward Bathsheba and Uriah acceptable. Cyrus’s role in restoring Israel did not make him a spiritual shepherd, and Nebuchadnezzar’s place in God’s plan did not protect him from being humbled.
We should not expect moral perfection from any candidate, but we should refuse to call sin insignificant merely because the person committing it advances policies we support. A vote should never become the surrender of our conscience.
God’s Use Does Not Equal God’s Endorsement
Can God use President Trump? He can, because God can use any ruler. He may use a president to appoint judges, restrain certain evils, protect religious liberty, shape foreign policy, or accomplish purposes we cannot yet see. He may also use a presidency to expose the condition of a nation, test the loyalties of His people, or reveal how easily the church can confuse political power with spiritual faithfulness. We should be careful about claiming to know precisely what God is doing.
Some Christians have called President Trump a modern Cyrus. The comparison is understandable because Cyrus was an unbelieving ruler whom God used for the good of His people. Isaiah, however, identified Cyrus by name and described the specific task God had appointed him to perform. We possess no comparable prophetic word concerning an American president. We may observe a similarity without declaring an identity God has not revealed.
Others compare President Trump to David or Samson. David and Samson show that God may work through men with serious sexual failures, but neither story excuses those failures. David was confronted and brought to repentance. Samson’s refusal to govern his desires brought terrible consequences. The wisest conclusion is not that President Trump is Cyrus, David, or Samson. The wisest conclusion is that the same God who ruled over them rules over him, and the same God who held them accountable will hold him accountable. God may use an imperfect leader without approving everything that leader does.
How Then Should Christians Respond?
We should pray for those in authority. Paul instructed believers to make supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings “for kings and all who are in authority” (1 Timothy 2:1–2). The rulers of Paul’s day were not Christians, and some were openly hostile toward the church. Prayer was not an endorsement of their character. Believers prayed because God was sovereign over them.
We should pray for President Trump, his administration, Congress, the courts, state and local officials, and the leaders of other nations. We should ask God to give them wisdom, humility, courage, restraint, and a concern for justice. We should pray that wrongdoing will be exposed, evil restrained, innocent people protected, and peace pursued. Most of all, we should pray that leaders who do not know Christ will come to saving faith in Him.
We should also examine leaders according to Scripture. Do they restrain evil or encourage it? Do they protect innocent life and value truth? Do they use authority to serve the people or to exalt themselves? Can they receive correction and accept responsibility when they are wrong? Do they recognize that their authority has limits?
Then we must examine ourselves. Are we applying the same standard to every leader? Have we excused behavior because we approve of the results? Have we allowed political agreement to become evidence of spiritual maturity? Have we treated another believer’s vote as though it revealed everything about her relationship with God? These questions are uncomfortable, but they are necessary.
Our Hope Is in a Better King
Political leaders matter. Their decisions affect laws, families, churches, schools, wars, economies, and the lives of millions of people. Christians should not be careless about the use of political power, but no president can redeem the human heart. No election can establish the kingdom of God, and no political party can bear the weight of our hope.
Jesus Christ alone is the righteous King. He never lies, abuses His authority, or uses another person for His own gratification. He does not exploit the weak or silence those who speak truth. He does not govern through pride, fear, or personal ambition. He gave Himself for His people.
Isaiah wrote of Him, “Of the increase of His government and peace there will be no end” (Isaiah 9:7). Revelation calls Him “KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS” (Revelation 19:16).
I can acknowledge that I voted for an imperfect man because of policies I believed were morally important. I can also refuse to excuse that man’s sin. I can understand why another Christian woman, especially another survivor of sexual abuse, reached a different conclusion. What I cannot do is move the standard of God’s Word to protect my political decision.
God has not surrendered His throne. Every leader remains accountable to Him. His sovereignty does not require us to excuse sin, and the presence of sin does not give us reason to doubt His sovereignty. Presidents come and go. Political movements rise and fade. Jesus Christ remains the same yesterday, today, and forever.
Truth to Carry
God can use an imperfect leader without approving everything that leader does. Voting for a candidate does not require us to defend his character, and refusing to vote for him does not settle every question of Christian faithfulness. We are called to think carefully, pray humbly, examine every leader by the same biblical standard, and treat fellow believers with grace when they reach a different conclusion.
Our confidence is not that every earthly leader will be good. Our confidence is that God is good, His authority is absolute, and His purposes will stand.
Questions for Personal or Group Study
- What is the difference between God using a leader and God approving of a leader?
- What does Cyrus teach us about God’s ability to work through someone who does not know Him?
- Why should David’s sin never be separated from his repentance and the consequences that followed?
- What does Samson teach us about the difference between strength and self-control?
- How does Paul’s transformation differ from God’s use of an unbelieving ruler?
- What did Nebuchadnezzar need to learn about the source of his authority?
- According to Romans 13, what responsibilities has God given governing authorities?
- Does voting for a candidate mean approving of everything that person has said or done?
- Have we applied the same moral standards to leaders we support and leaders we oppose?
- Can two Christians share the same commitment to Scripture and still weigh political concerns differently?
- When does political support begin to become political idolatry?
- How can we speak honestly about a leader’s sin without speaking with hatred or malice?
- Are we more willing to overlook wrongdoing when we believe a leader is producing results we want?
- What would it look like to place our political choices fully under the authority of Christ?
Closing Prayer
Father, You are Lord over every nation and every ruler. You raise up kings and remove them, and no human authority is beyond Your reach. Give us wisdom to view the leaders of our time through the truth of Your Word. Keep us from excusing sin because it appears in someone we support, and keep us from refusing to recognize good because it comes through someone we oppose. Teach us to value truth more than political victory and faithfulness more than influence.
Give wisdom, humility, and restraint to those who govern. Protect unborn children, defend those who are vulnerable, restrain evil, uphold justice, and bring peace where there is war. Draw our leaders to repentance and saving faith in Jesus Christ.
Guard our hearts from fear, pride, anger, and political idolatry. Help us speak truth with courage and grace. Teach us to listen patiently to brothers and sisters who have weighed difficult choices differently, while keeping every conviction beneath the authority of Scripture.
Thank You that our hope does not rest upon an election, a political party, or a human ruler. Our hope rests in Jesus Christ, our righteous and eternal King. In Jesus name, Amen.
Foundations in Scripture 