Why Was Peter Afraid?

by Clay Gentry

In Galatians 2:11-14, the Apostle Paul recounts a surprising incident that occurred in the church in Antioch. Peter, who had been freely sharing meals and fellowship with Gentile believers, abruptly “separated himself, fearing the circumcision party” after “certain men arrived from James” (that is, Jewish-Christians from Jerusalem).

For us today, it can be challenging to grasp the profound significance of table fellowship in the early church. In our modern context, we rarely pause to consider the ethnic or religious backgrounds of our tablemates when sharing a meal. Yet, for Jews and Gentiles to eat together was a truly paradigm-shifting aspect of the gospel. More than just a social gathering, sharing food, especially the Lord’s Supper, was a powerful testament to the socially transformative power of the gospel and a profound symbol of acceptance and unity in Christ.

But Peter was no stranger to challenging Jewish customs regarding Gentiles. After his divinely orchestrated encounter with the Gentile Cornelius, Peter preached to and baptized him and his household (Acts 10). When members of the “circumcision party” later criticized Peter, saying, “You went to uncircumcised men and ate with them” (Acts 11:2-3), Peter did not retreat in fear. Instead, he boldly recounted the course of events that led him to understand God’s will, declaring, “God has shown me that I should not call any person common or unclean” (Act 10:28). This statement encapsulates the revolutionary truth that God had broken down barriers between Jew and Gentile, declaring all who believe in Christ to be one in His sight (cf. Ephesians 2:14-16).

So, considering his prior conviction and courageous stance, why would Peter give in to fear when these men arrived in Antioch, leading him to withdraw from fellowship with his Gentile brethren? Several motivations may have played a role:

• Anxiety about his mission to the Jews: Peter was appointed to “the circumcised” (Galatians 2:8) - also known as Jews. He might have been anxious about how his open association with Gentiles could be perceived by those in his primary mission field, potentially hindering his evangelistic efforts among them.
• Fear of suffering further persecution: Peter had already experienced persecution from Jewish authorities for preaching Christ (Acts 4:1-3ff; 5:17-18ff). He may have feared further violent opposition from believing and unbelieving Jews (cf. Galatians 6:12) who vehemently opposed any blurring of the lines between Jews and Gentiles. Perhaps, in his mind, dining with Gentiles wasn’t worth the pain.
• Concern for his reputation among Jewish Christians in Jerusalem: The church in Jerusalem, particularly some who were “zealous for the Law” (Acts 21:20), held significant influence. Peter might have been concerned about how his actions would be perceived by these influential Jewish believers and their traditional avoidance of Gentiles, potentially leading to a loss of respect or even alienation.

What Paul termed “fear,” Peter might have rationalized as expedient or advantageous to avoid conflict. However, from Paul’s perspective, such human reasoning, driven by fear, represented a dangerous compromise of the gospel’s core truth. Paul recognized that Peter’s actions, despite any good intentions or perceived practical benefits, contradicted the very unity and equality found in Christ (cf. Ephesians 2:14-16). It was a retreat from the “truth of the gospel” (Galatians 2:14) that Peter himself had embraced and courageously proclaimed.

Paul’s public confrontation of Peter serves as a powerful reminder: Fear leads to hypocrisy, and hypocrisy leads to a denial of the clear message of the gospel. Like Peter, we too face pressures – whether from internal anxieties, social expectations – to prioritize comfort, reputation, or social acceptance over divine truth. Let us steadfastly guard against such fear, ensuring our lives always reflect, rather than compromise, the unchanging truth of the gospel.