The Jerusalem Council
This article is about the 1st-century Council of early Christianity.
Contents
Details About the Council of Jerusalem
Date c. 50
Accepted by most Christian denominations
Next Council Ancient church councils (pre-ecumenical) and the First Council of Nicaea
President unspecified, but presumably James the Just and perhaps Simon Peter
Topics Controversy about male circumcision and the validity of the Mosaic Law
The Council of Jerusalem or the Apostolic Council was held in Jerusalem around AD 50. It is unique among the ancient pre-ecumenical councils. It is considered by Catholics and Eastern Orthodox to be a prototype and forerunner of future councils and a crucial part of Christian ethics. The Council decided that Gentile converts to Christianity were not obligated to keep most of the fasts, and other specific rituals, including the rules concerning the circumcision of males. However, the Council retained the prohibitions on eating blood, meat containing blood, and meat of animals that were strangled, and fornication and idolatry, sometimes referred to as the Apostolic Decree or Jerusalem Quadrilateral. The purpose and origin of these four prohibitions are debated.
Reports of the Council are found in Acts of the Apostles chapter 15 (in two different forms, the Alexandrian and Western versions) and possibly in Paul's letter to the Galatians (chapter 2). Some scholars dispute that Galatians 2 is about the Council of Jerusalem, while others have defended this identification.
Historical background
The Council of Jerusalem is generally dated to 48 AD, roughly 15 to 25 years after the crucifixion of Jesus, between 26 and 36 AD. Acts 15 and Galatians 2 both suggest that the meeting was called to debate whether or not male Gentiles who were converting to become followers of Jesus were required to become circumcised; the rite of circumcision was considered crude and repulsive during the period of Hellenization of the Eastern Mediterranean and was significantly adverse: acting against or in a contrary direction: hostile. In Classical civilization, both ancient Greeks and Romans valued the foreskin positively.
At the time, most followers of Jesus (which historians refer to as Jewish Christians) were Jewish by birth, and even converts would have considered the early Christians as a part of Judaism. According to scholars, the Jewish Christians affirmed every aspect of the then-contemporary Second Temple Judaism with the addition of the belief that Jesus was the Messiah. Unless males were circumcised, they could not be God's People. The meeting was called to decide whether circumcision for gentile converts was necessary for community members since specific individuals were teaching that "unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved."
Issues and outcome
The purpose of the meeting, according to Acts, was to resolve a disagreement in Antioch, which had broader implications than just circumcision since circumcision is the "everlasting" sign of the Abrahamic covenant (Genesis 17:9–14). Some of the Pharisees who had become believers insisted that it was "needful to circumcise them and to command [them] to keep the law of Moses" (KJV).
The primary issue was related to the requirement of circumcision, as the author of Acts relates, but other essential matters arose as well, as the Apostolic Decree indicates. The dispute was between those, such as the followers of the "Pillars of the Church," led by James, who believed, following his interpretation of the Great Commission, that the Church must observe the Torah, i.e., the rules of traditional Judaism, and Paul the Apostle, who believed there was no such necessity. The main concern for the Apostle Paul, which he subsequently expressed in greater detail with his letters directed to the early Christian communities in Asia Minor, was the inclusion of Gentiles into God's New Covenant, sending the message that faith in Christ is sufficient for salvation. (See also Supersessionism, New Covenant, Antinomianism, Hellenistic Judaism, and Paul the Apostle and Judaism)
At the Council, following advice offered by Simon Peter (Acts 15:7–11 and Acts 15:14), Barnabas and Paul gave an account of their ministry among the gentiles (Acts 15:12), and the apostle James quoted from the words of the prophet Amos (Acts 15:16–17, quoting Amos 9:11–12). James added his own words to the quotation: "Known to God from eternity are all His works" and then submitted a proposal, which was accepted by the Church and became known as the Apostolic Decree:
The Law of Moses has been preached in every city from the earliest times and is read in the synagogues every Sabbath. Therefore, I judge that we should not make it difficult for the Gentiles turning to God. Instead, we should write to them, telling them to abstain from food polluted by idols, sexual immorality, the meat of strangled animals, and blood —?Acts 15:19–21
Acts 15:23–29 sets out the letter's content written per James' proposal. The Western version of Acts (see Acts of the Apostles: Manuscripts) adds the negative form of the Golden Rule ("and whatever things ye would not have done to yourselves, do not do to another").
This determined questions broader than that of circumcision, particularly dietary questions, fornication and idolatry and blood, and the application of Biblical Law to non-Jews. It was stated in the Council: "the Holy Spirit and we have favored adding no further burden to you, except these necessary things, to abstain from things sacrificed to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication. If you carefully keep yourselves from these things, you will prosper." (Acts 15:27–28) Moreover, this Apostolic Decree was considered binding on other local Christian congregations in other regions. (See also Biblical Law directed at non-Jews, Seven Laws of Noah, Biblical Law in Christianity, and Ten Commandments in Christianity)
The writer of Acts gives an account of a restatement by James and the elders in Jerusalem of the contents of the letter on the occasion of Paul's final Jerusalem visit, immediately prior to Paul's arrest at the temple, recounting: "When we had come to Jerusalem, the brothers received us gladly. On the following day Paul went in with us to James, and all the elders were present." (Acts 21:17–18, ESV) The elders then notify Paul of what seems to have been a common concern among Jewish believers. He taught Diaspora Jewish converts to Christianity "to forsake Moses, telling them not to circumcise their children or walk; according to our customs." They remind the assembly that, "as for the Gentiles who have believed, we have sent a letter with our judgment that they should abstain from what has been sacrificed to idols, and from blood, and from what has been strangled, and from sexual immorality." In the view of some scholars, the reminder of James and the elders here is an expression of concern that Paul was not entirely teaching the decision of the Jerusalem Council's letter to Gentiles, particularly regarding non-strangled kosher meat, which contrasts with Paul's advice to Gentiles in Corinth, to "eat whatever is sold in the meat markets" (1 Corinthians 10:25).
Historicity
The description of the Apostolic Council in Acts 15, generally considered the same event described in Galatians 2, is considered by some scholars to be contradictory to the Galatians account. The historicity of Luke's account has been challenged and was entirely rejected by some scholars in the mid to late 20th century. However, more recent scholarship inclines to treat the Jerusalem Council and its rulings as historical events, though they are sometimes expressed with caution.
In conclusion, therefore, it appears that the least unsatisfactory solution to the complicated textual and exegetical problems of the Apostolic Decree is to regard the fourfold decree as original (foods offered to idols, strangled meat, eating blood, and unchastity—whether ritual or moral), and to explain the two forms of the threefold decree[30] in some such way as those suggested above.[31] An extensive literature exists on the text and exegesis of the Apostolic Decree. According to Jacques Dupont, "Present-day scholarship is practically unanimous in considering the 'Eastern' text of the decree as the only authentic text (in four items) and in interpreting its prescriptions in a sense not ethical but ritual" [Les problèmes du Livre des Actes d'après les travaux récents (Louvain, 1950), p.70].
James's "Apostolic Decree" was that the requirement of circumcision for males was not obligatory for Gentile converts, possibly making it easier for them to join the movement. However, the Council did retain the prohibitions against Gentile converts eating meat containing blood or meat of animals not properly slain. It also retained the prohibitions against "fornication" and "idol worship." The decree may have been a principal act of differentiation of the Church from its Jewish roots.
The Jewish Encyclopedia states:
For fabulous as was the success of Barnabas and Paul in the heathen world, the authorities in Jerusalem insisted upon circumcision as the condition of admission of members into the Church until, on the initiative of Peter and of James, the head of the Jerusalem church, it was agreed that acceptance of the Noachian Laws—namely, regarding avoidance of idolatry, fornication, and the eating of flesh cut from a living animal—should be demanded of the heathen desirous of entering the Church.
