Was Paul right when he rebuked Peter for disassociating with the Gentiles while in Antioch?

Question: Some find fault with Peter when in Galatians 2:11-14 mentions that he rebuked Peter for disassociating himself with the Gentiles at Antioch. What do you say?

Answer: As I have mentioned elsewhere, no one can anyone deny that Peter’s subsequent role in the formation of the Church was not singularly unique? It is obvious that Peter was the spokesman for the primitive Church and, as in the Jerusalem Council (Acts 15) his pronouncements were only affirmed, never superseded. It may be argued by some that Peter and Paul disagreed doctrinally over the role of the Gentiles in the Church; however, Peter had no problem with the doctrine—his problem was with its social implementation. Paul, it should be noted, as much as admitted that Peter was on the right track when he himself had Timothy circumcised:

Paul came to Derbe and then to Lystra, where a disciple named Timothy lived, whose mother was Jewish and a believer but whose father was a Greek. The believers at Lystra and Iconium spoke well of him. Paul wanted to take him along on the journey, so he circumcised him because of the Jews who lived in that area, for they all knew that his father was a Greek. (Acts 16:1-3)

So, the so-called famous feud between Paul and Peter was not a doctrinal issue at all, it was rather a matter of implementation. Here’s the story:

        11 When Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned. 12 For before certain men came from James, he used to eat with the Gentiles. But when they arrived, he began to draw back and separate himself from the Gentiles because he was afraid of those who belonged to the circumcision group. 13 The other Jews joined him in his hypocrisy, so that by their hypocrisy even Barnabas was led astray.


        14 When I saw that they were not acting in line with the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas in front of them all, “You are a Jew, yet you live like a Gentile and not like a Jew. How is it, then, that you force Gentiles to follow Jewish customs? (Galatians 2:11-14 (NIV)

Therefore it seem obvious to the unbiased exegete that this was not a doctrinal dispute at all, but rather one of conduct. And, if Paul’s subsequent action by having Timothy circumcised is any clue it seems as if Peter not Paul won the day. In any event, Peter certainly did not hold a grudge for he readily admitted that Paul’s epistles were inspired and as such to be considered part of Holy Scripture (2 Peter 3:16).