That has nothing to do with "denying the work of Christ" and everything to do with following his orders. He wasn't just blowing smoke in John 20:23.
These are essential points PROTESTANTS ought to agree on, but for some reason this is being forgotten for the sake of politics. The fact that so many Protestants are embracing the character arguments to support a candidate
If you're only going to vote for candidates with whose theology you're in perfect agreement, you should probably think about running for office yourself so you'll have someone to vote for.
At this point, this election is between two Catholics, a Mormon with a track record of liberalism, and a communist with Muslim sympathies. You can decide that believing Catholics are Christians with whom you share a considerable amount of agreement, or you can let one of the other two win. You pick.
“If you’re only going to vote for candidates with whose theology you’re in perfect agreement, you should probably think about running for office yourself so you’ll have someone to vote for.”
Considering I’m a pretty outspoken supporter of Newt Gingrich, this whole paragraph from you basically means you don’t understand where I’m coming from.
My comment was aimed at Protestants who are getting into the character arguments as their major reason to support someone, even going so far as to ignore major differences in doctrine.
“That has nothing to do with “denying the work of Christ” and everything to do with following his orders. He wasn’t just blowing smoke in John 20:23.”
The orders of Christ, however, are sometimes in direct contradiction to orders given by man. The fact of the matter is, Catholicism places Saints, rituals and objects directly between people and Christ. It is directly in contradiction to the spirit of worship Christ said would come, when men would no longer worship in the large, visible Jewish temple, but “in spirit and in truth”, where “two or three” gather and form a Church proper, where man knocks on CHRIST’S door, instead of some Priest.