THE COUNCIL OF JERUSALEM

The Council of Jerusalem (or Apostolic Conference) is a name applied by historians to an Early Christian council that was held in Jerusalem and dated to around the year 50. The council decided that Gentile converts to Christianity were not obligated to keep most of the Mosaic law, including the rules concerning circumcision of males, however, the Council did retain the prohibitions against eating blood, or eating meat containing blood, or meat of animals not properly slain, and against fornication and idolatry. Descriptions of the council are found in Acts of the Apostles chapter 15 (in two different forms, the Alexandrian and Western versions) and also possibly in Paul's letter to the Galatians chapter 2[1]. Some scholars dispute that Galatians 2 is about the Council of Jerusalem (notably because Galatians 2 describes a private meeting) while other scholars dispute the historical reliability of the Acts of the Apostles. Paul was likely an eyewitness, a major person in attendance, whereas Luke, the writer of Luke-Acts, who was a later follower of Paul, may not have been in attendance, and thus may have written second-hand, about the meeting he described in Acts 15.

Council of Jerusalem generally dated to around year 50 AD, roughly 20 years after death of Jesus of Nazareth, dated between 26-36, (see Chronology of Jesus). It has not been established to have been the first council of the new community's leaders, but it is the first one of which records exists (in Galatians 2, in Acts 15, and in the writings of the Church Fathers). The account in Acts may not have been written by an eyewitness to the event, but Galatians (if it is about the Council of Jerusalem) was; and both accounts suggest that the reason the meeting was called was to debate whether or not male Gentiles who were converting to become followers of Jesus were required to become circumcised, presumably in accord with Genesis 17:14, a law from God which according to Genesis 17:13-19 God said would be eternal, and therefore always applicable, see also the Jewish background to the 1st century circumcision controversy and Biblical law in Christianity. However, Circumcision was considered repulsive during the period of Hellenization of the Eastern Mediterranean[2].
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 Alister McGrath, the Jewish Christians affirmed every aspect of then contemporary (Second Temple) Judaism with the addition of the belief that Jesus was the Messiah.[3] Unless males were circumcised, they could not be God's People. Genesis 17:14 said "No uncircumcised man will be one of my people." The meeting was called because, according to the NRSV translation of Acts 15:1-2, "Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved." However, this command is given considerably before Moses' time, stemming from the time of Abraham (see also Abrahamic covenant), but it is cited as 'the custom of Moses' because Moses is the traditional giver of the Law as a whole. Jesus himself also says in John 7:22 that Moses gave the people circumcision. It was hard for Gentile Christians to keep up with all the laws listed in the Jewish Scriptures, which Christians came to call the "Old Testament", a term linked with Supersessionism (see the proposed more neutral modern term "Hebrew Bible" for details)[4].
The purpose of the meeting, according to Acts, was to resolve a disagreement in Antioch, which had wider 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", according to the popular KJV translation[5] while another translation[6] translates: "They have to be circumcised; we have to proclaim and keep the law of Moses".
The primary issue which was addressed related to the requirement of circumcision, as the author of Acts relates, but other 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,[1] and Paul of Tarsus, who believed there was no such necessity. (See also Supersessionism, New Covenant, Antinomianism, Hellenistic Judaism, Paul of Tarsus and Judaism)
At the Council, following advice said to have been offered by Simon Peter (Acts 15:7–11), James, the leader of the Jerusalem Church, gave his decision (later known as the "Apostolic Decree"):

"Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God: But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood.[2] For Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every Sabbath day" (Acts 15:19–21).

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").[3]
This determined questions wider than that of circumcision, most particularly dietary questions but also fornication and idolatry, and also the application of Biblical law to non-Jews. And this Apostolic Decree was considered binding on all the other local Christian congregations in other regions.[7] See also Biblical law directed at non-Jews, Seven Laws of Noah, Biblical law in Christianity, and the Ten Commandments in Christianity.