Quote
But most importantly, concerning Peter's misconduct in Antioch, I think you are overlooking an obvious factor here. There can be no doubt that this was Peter's private misconduct and not an infallible act. For if it was an official teaching, we would not only be allowed, but indeed charged with the duty to imitate his behavior. The same principle applying panscriptura would have us committing murder and adultery like David, getting drunk like Noah, lying like Abraham, and committing idolatry like Solomon.

So yes, Ma'am, this is clearly the private misconduct of Peter, and we are to regard in only as an example of what not to do. But his official acts, the sermon's and discourses, are infallible, and we are to heed them.

Because it's not recommended to us, therefore it must necessarily have been private and personal? It's not recommended to us because Peter was wrong, period. Peter's denial of Christ was PUBLIC, after all, not "private" and merely "personal." Yet Peter was wrong, because not even the Apostles were infallible, but only those things which they spoke and wrote by inspiration of the Holy Ghost, and which have been preserved for us in Holy Scripture.

Kyle

I tell you, this man went down to his house justified.