Council of Jerusalem

File:Saint James the Just.jpg

James the Just, whose judgment was adopted in the Apostolic Decree of Template:Bibleverse, Template:Circa: "we should write to them [Gentiles] to abstain only from things polluted by idols and from fornication and from whatever has been strangled and from blood..." (NRSV)

The Council of Jerusalem or Apostolic Council is a council described in chapter 15 of the Acts of the Apostles, held in Jerusalem Template:Circa.

The council decided that Gentiles who converted to Christianity were not obligated to keep most of the rules prescribed to the Jews by the Mosaic Law, such as Jewish dietary laws and other specific rituals, including the rules concerning circumcision of males.<ref name="Cross-Livingstone 2005-Paul">Template:Cite book</ref><ref name="Bokenkotter"/><ref name="Stendahl 1963"/><ref name="Dunn 1993"/><ref name="Thiessen 2014">Template:Cite journal</ref> The council did, however, retain the prohibitions on eating blood or meat containing blood, and meat of animals that were strangled, and on fornication and idolatry, sometimes referred to as the Apostolic Decree.<ref name="Cross-Livingstone 2005-Paul"/> The purpose and origin of these four prohibitions is debated.<ref name="Fitzmyer 1998"/>

Accounts 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).<ref name="Dunn 1993"/><ref name="Thiessen 2014"/><ref name="Paul"/><ref>Whether or not Template:Bibleverse is a record of the Council of Jerusalem or a different event is not agreed. Paul writes of laying his gospel before the others "privately", not in a Council. It has been argued that Galatians was written as Paul was on his way to the Council (see Paul the Apostle). Raymond E. Brown in his Introduction to the New Testament argues that they (Acts 15 and Galatians 2) are the same event but each from a different viewpoint with its own bias.</ref> Some scholars dispute that Galatians 2 is about the Council of Jerusalem, while others have defended this identification.<ref name=":0" />

Historical background

Jerusalem was the first center of the Christian Church according to the Book of Acts<ref name="Bokenkotter"/> and (according to the Catholic Encyclopedia) the location of "the first Christian church".<ref>Jerusalem (A.D. 71–1099): "During the first Christian centuries the church at this place was the centre of Christianity in Jerusalem, "Holy and glorious Sion, mother of all churches" (Intercession in "St. James' Liturgy", ed. Brightman, p. 54). Saint Mark of syriac orthodox church is also known as last supper church and believe first christian church. "</ref> The apostles lived and taught there for some time after Pentecost.<ref name="Cross-Livingstone 2005-James">Template:Cite book</ref> James the Just, brother of Jesus was leader of the early Christian community in Jerusalem, and his other kinsmen likely held leadership positions in the surrounding area after the destruction of the city until its rebuilding as Aelia Capitolina in Template:Circa, when all Jews were banished from Jerusalem.<ref name="Cross-Livingstone 2005-James"/>

The apostles Barnabas and Paul went to Jerusalem to meet with the "Pillars of the Church":<ref name="Bokenkotter"/><ref>St. James the Less Catholic Encyclopedia: "Then we lose sight of James till St. Paul, three years after his conversion (A.D. 37), went up to Jerusalem. ... On the same occasion, the "pillars" of the Church, James, Peter, and John "gave to me (Paul) and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship; that we should go unto the Gentiles, and they unto the circumcision" (Template:Bibleverse)."</ref> James the Just, Peter, and John.<ref name="Cross-Livingstone 2005-Paul"/><ref name="Bokenkotter"/> The Council of Jerusalem is generally dated to Template:Circa, roughly 15 to 25 years after the crucifixion of Jesus (between AD 26 and 36). Acts 15 and Galatians 2 both suggest that the meeting was called to debate the legitimacy of the evangelizing mission of Barnabas and Paul to the Gentiles and the Gentile converts' freedom from most of the Mosaic Law,<ref name="Cross-Livingstone 2005-Paul"/><ref name="Bokenkotter"/> especially from the circumcision of males,<ref name="Cross-Livingstone 2005-Paul"/> a practice that was considered execrable and repulsive in the Greco-Roman world during the period of Hellenization of the Eastern Mediterranean,<ref name="Hodges2001">Template:Cite journal</ref><ref name="Rubin 1980">Template:Cite journal</ref><ref name="Fredriksen 2018">Template:Cite book</ref><ref name="Schultheiss 1998">Template:Cite journal</ref><ref>Template:Cite web</ref> and was especially disdained by both ancient Greeks and Romans, who instead valued the foreskin positively.<ref name="Hodges2001"/><ref name="Rubin 1980"/><ref name="Schultheiss 1998"/><ref name="Fredriksen 2018"/><ref>Template:Cite book</ref>

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 contemporary Second Temple Judaism with the addition of the belief that Jesus was the Jewish Messiah.<ref>McGrath, Alister E., Christianity: An Introduction. Blackwell Publishing (2006). Template:ISBN. Page 174: "In effect, they [Jewish Christians] seemed to regard Christianity as an affirmation of every aspect of contemporary Judaism, with the addition of one extra belief — that Jesus was the Messiah."</ref>

Issues and outcome

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 considered the "everlasting" sign of the Abrahamic covenant in Judaism (Template:Bibleverse). The Acts say that "certain men which came down from Judaea" were preaching that Template:Nowrap you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved";<ref>Template:Bibleverse</ref> Acts states that furthermore some of the Pharisees who had become believers stated that it was "needful to circumcise [the Gentiles,] and to command [them] to keep the law of Moses" (KJV).<ref>Template:Bibleverse</ref>

The primary issue which was addressed related to the requirement of circumcision, as the author of Acts relates, but other important matters arose as well, as the Apostolic Decree indicates.<ref name="Cross-Livingstone 2005-Paul" /> The dispute was between those such as the followers of the "Pillars of the Church", led by James, who believed that the church must observe the Torah (i.e. the rules of traditional Judaism (Template:Bibleverse)), and Paul the Apostle, who called himself "Apostle to the Gentiles",<ref>Template:Cite book</ref> who believed there was no such necessity.<ref name="Cross-Livingstone 2005-Paul" /><ref name="Bokenkotter" /><ref name="Klutz 2002">Template:Cite book</ref><ref name="Seifrid 1992">Template:Cite book</ref> The main concern for 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.<ref name="Cross-Livingstone 2005-Paul" /><ref name="Klutz 2002" /><ref name="Seifrid 1992" />

At the council, following advice offered by Peter (Template:Bibleverse and Template:Bibleverse), Barnabas and Paul gave an account of their ministry among the gentiles (Template:Bibleverse), and James quoted from the words of the prophet Amos (Template:Bibleverse, quoting Template:Bibleverse). James added his own words<ref>Gill, J., "Acts 15". Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible. Accessed 13 September 2015.</ref> to the quotation: "Known to God from eternity are all His works"<ref>Template:Bibleverse</ref> and then submitted a proposal, which was accepted by the Church and became known as the Apostolic Decree:

Template:Bibleverse sets out the content of the letter written in accordance with 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").Template:Efn

This determined questions wider than that of circumcision, particularly dietary questions, fornication, idolatry, and blood, as well as the application of Biblical law to non-Jews. It was stated by the apostles and elders in the council: "the Holy Spirit and we ourselves 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) This Apostolic Decree was considered binding on all the other local Christian congregations in other regions.<ref>"Apostolic Presbyterianism" Template:Webarchive by William Cunningham and Reg Barrow.</ref>

The author 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 proceed to notify Paul of what seems to have been a common concern among Jewish believers, that he was teaching 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 fully teaching the decision of the Jerusalem Council's letter to Gentiles,<ref>Robert McQueen Grant Augustus to Constantine: The Rise and triumph of Christianity in the Roman World. Louisville: Westminster John Knox, p. iv. "According to Acts 21:25, the elders at Jerusalem were still concerned with observance of them when Paul last "</ref> particularly in regard to non-strangled kosher meat,<ref>Paul Barnett (2004). Jesus & the Rise of Early Christianity: A History of New Testament. p. 292. "He chided Paul later for his failure to require the Gentiles to observe the decree (Acts 21:25). Paul delivered the letter from the Jerusalem meeting expressing James's decree, but only to churches in Syria, Cilicia and Galatia ... Paul did not impose the food requirements for the kosher-killed meat and against the idol-sacrificed meat upon the Corinthians"</ref> which contrasts with Paul's advice to Gentiles in Corinth,<ref>1 Corinthians: a new translation Volume 32 Anchor Bible William Fridell Orr, James Arthur Walther – 1976 "Paul's openness regarding dietary restrictions raises again the question of the connection with the decrees of the council at Jerusalem (Acts 15:29; Introduction, pp. 63–65). There is no hint here of an apostolic decree involving food."</ref> to "eat whatever is sold in the meat markets" (1 Corinthians 10:25).<ref>Gordon D. Fee (1987). The First Epistle to the Corinthians. p. 480. "Paul's 'rule' for everyday life in Corinth is a simple one: 'Eat anything sold in the meat marketTemplate:'".</ref>

Historicity

The description of the Apostolic Council in Acts 15, generally considered the same event described in Galatians 2,<ref>"In spite of the presence of discrepancies between these two accounts, most scholars agree that they do in fact refer to the same event.", Paget, "Jewish Christianity", in Horbury, et al., "The Cambridge History of Judaism: The Early Roman Period", volume 3, p. 744 (2008). Cambridge University Press.</ref> is considered by some scholars to be contradictory to the Galatians account.<ref>"Paul's account of the Jerusalem Council in Galatians 2 and the account of it recorded in Acts have been considered by some scholars as being in open contradiction.", Paget, "Jewish Christianity", in Horbury, et al., "The Cambridge History of Judaism: The Early Roman Period", volume 3, p. 744 (2008). Cambridge University Press.</ref> The historicity of Luke's account in Acts has been challenged<ref>"There is a very strong case against the historicity of Luke's account of the Apostolic Council", Esler, "Community and Gospel in Luke-Acts: The Social and Political Motivations of Lucan Theology", p. 97 (1989). Cambridge University Press.</ref><ref>"The historicity of Luke's account in Acts 15 has been questioned on a number of grounds.", Paget, "Jewish Christianity", in Horbury, et al., "The Cambridge History of Judaism: The Early Roman Period", volume 3, p. 744 (2008). Cambridge University Press.</ref><ref>"However, numerous scholars have challenged the historicity of the Jerusalem Council as related by Acts, Paul's presence there in the manner that Luke describes, the issue of idol-food being thrust on Paul's Gentile mission, and the historical reliability of Acts in general.", Fotopolous, "Food Offered to Idols in Roman Corinth: a socio-rhetorical reconsideration", pp. 181–182 (2003). Mohr Siebeck.</ref> and was rejected by some scholars in the mid to late 20th century.<ref>"Sahlin rejects the historicity of Acts completely (Der Messias und das Gottesvolk [1945]). Haenchen's view is that the Apostolic Council "is an imaginary construction answering to no historical reality" (The Acts of the Apostles [Engtr 1971], p. 463). Dibelius' view (Studies in the Acts of the Apostles [Engtr 1956], pp. 93–101) is that Luke's treatment is literary-theological and can make no claim to historical worth.", Mounce, "Apostolic Council", in Bromiley (ed.) "The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia", volume 1, p. 200 (rev. ed. 2001). Wm. B. Eerdmans.</ref> However, more recent scholarship inclines towards treating the Jerusalem Council and its rulings as a historical event,<ref name=":0">"There is an increasing trend among scholars toward considering the Jerusalem Council as historical event. An overwhelming majority identifies the reference to the Jerusalem Council in Acts 15 with Paul's account in Gal. 2.1–10, and this accord is not just limited to the historicity of the gathering alone but extends also to the authenticity of the arguments deriving from the Jerusalem church itself.", Philip, "The Origins of Pauline Pneumatology: the Eschatological Bestowal of the Spirit", Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 2, Reihe, p. 205 (2005). Mohr Siebeck.</ref> though this is sometimes expressed with caution.<ref>"The present writer accepts its basic historicity, i.e. that there was an event at Jerusalem concerning the matter of the entry of the Gentiles into the Christian community, but would be circumspect about going much further than that. For a robust defence of its historicity, see Bauckham, "James", and the relevant literature cited there.", Paget, "Jewish Christianity", in Horbury, et al., "The Cambridge History of Judaism: The Early Roman Period", volume 3, p. 744 (2008). Cambridge University Press.</ref> Bruce Metzger's Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament includes a summary of current research on the topic as of about 1994: Template:Blockquote

Origin of the Council's decision

The Council of Jerusalem retained the prohibitions on eating blood, meat containing blood, and meat of animals that were strangled, and on fornication and idolatry. The resulting Apostolic Decree in Acts 15 may simply parallel the seven Noahide laws found in the Old Testament, and thus be a commonality rather than a differential.<ref name="Fitzmyer 1998"/><ref>Template:Cite journal</ref><ref>Template:Cite journal</ref> However, modern scholars dispute the connection between Acts 15 and the seven Noahide laws.<ref name="Fitzmyer 1998"/> The Apostolic Decree may have been a major act of differentiation of the early Church from its Jewish roots.<ref name="Baptism-JE">Jewish Encyclopedia: Baptism: "According to rabbinical teachings, which dominated even during the existence of the Temple (Pes. viii. 8), Baptism, next to circumcision and sacrifice, was an absolutely necessary condition to be fulfilled by a proselyte to Judaism (Yeb. 46b, 47b; Ker. 9a; 'Ab. Zarah 57a; Shab. 135a; Yer. Kid. iii. 14, 64d). Circumcision, however, was much more important, and, like baptism, was called a "seal" (Schlatter, "Die Kirche Jerusalems," 1898, p. 70). But as circumcision was discarded by Christianity, and the sacrifices had ceased, Baptism remained the sole condition for initiation into religious life. The next ceremony, adopted shortly after the others, was the imposition of hands, which, it is known, was the usage of the Jews at the ordination of a rabbi. Anointing with oil, which at first also accompanied the act of Baptism, and was analogous to the anointment of priests among the Jews, was not a necessary condition."</ref>

The Jewish Encyclopedia states:

The Jewish Encyclopedia also states:

The 20th-century American Catholic priest and biblical scholar Joseph A. Fitzmyer Template:Post-nominals disputes the claim that the Apostolic Decree is based on the seven Noahide laws (Template:Bibleverse), and instead proposes Template:Bibleverse as the basis for it.<ref name="Fitzmyer 1998">Template:Cite book</ref> (See also: Leviticus 18).

Obsolescence

While the prohibitions of the Apostolic Decree were reiterated in the Apostolic Canons<ref>Canon 63: "If any bishop, or presbyter or deacon or anyone else on the sacerdotal list at all, eat meat in the blood of its soul, or that has been killed by a wild beast, or that has died a natural death, let him be deposed. For the Law has forbidden this. But if any layman do the same let him be excommunicated."</ref> and at the Council in Trullo,<ref>Canon 67: "Divine Scripture has commanded us to ‘abstain from blood, and strangled flesh and fornication’ (Gen 9:3-4, Lev 17 & 18:3, Acts 15: 28-29). We therefore suitably penance those who on account of their dainty stomach eat the blood of any animal after they have rendered it eatable by some art. If therefore anyone from now on should attempt to eat the blood of any animal in any way whatsoever, if he be a clergyman, let him be deposed from office; but if he be a layman let him be excommunicated. "</ref> it "has been obsolete for centuries in the West", according to the 19th-century German Catholic bishop Karl Josef von Hefele,<ref>Karl Josef von Hefele's commentary on canon II of Gangra notes: "We further see that, at the time of the Synod of Gangra, the rule of the Apostolic Synod with regard to blood and things strangled was still in force. With the Greeks, indeed, it continued always in force as their Euchologies still show. Balsamon also, the well-known commentator on the canons of the Middle Ages, in his commentary on the sixty-third Apostolic Canon, expressly blames the Latins because they had ceased to observe this command. What the Latin Church, however, thought on this subject about the year 400, is shown by St. Augustine in his work Contra Faustum, where he states that the Apostles had given this command in order to unite the heathens and Jews in the one ark of Noah; but that then, when the barrier between Jewish and heathen converts had fallen, this command concerning things strangled and blood had lost its meaning, and was only observed by few. But still, as late as the eighth century, Pope Gregory the Third (731) forbade the eating of blood or things strangled under threat of a penance of forty days. No one will pretend that the disciplinary enactments of any council, even though it be one of the undisputed Ecumenical Synods, can be of greater and more unchanging force than the decree of that first council, held by the Holy Apostles at Jerusalem, and the fact that its decree has been obsolete for centuries in the West is proof that even Ecumenical canons may be of only temporary utility and may be repealed by disuse, like other laws."</ref> though it is still nominally recognized and observed by Eastern Orthodox Christians.<ref>Convent of St. Elisabeth, Minsk, Belarus. Eating food that has blood in it</ref>

The apostolic decree was defined by the Council of Florence to have been obsolete when the distinction between Jewish and gentile converts had disappeared:

This reasoning was repeated in Pope Urban VIII's Creed for Oriental converts of 1642 <ref>Professio Orthodoxae Fidei ab orientalibus facienda, Congregatio De Propaganda Fide, 1642: 18. And [I believe] also that that prohibition of the Apostles of foods sacrificed to idols, and of blood, and of what has been strangled was suited to that time, so that matter for dissension between Jews and Gentiles might be taken away. With the cause of that Apostolic prohibition coming to an end, the effect came to an end also.</ref> and Pope Benedict XIV's encyclical Ex Quo of 1756.<ref>Ex Quo, Benedict XIV, 1756: 62. So the Decree for the Jacobites of the Council of Florence reads: "The holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes, and preaches that every creature of God is good and not to be rejected if it is taken with thanks. According to the Lord's word, a man is not defiled by what enters his mouth. The Church affirms that the distinction made by the Mosaic Law between clean and unclean foods belongs to the ceremonial laws which have passed away with the coming of the Gospel…. So it declares that no kind of food is to be condemned which human society regards as food, and no distinction is to be made between animals on the basis of gender or the manner of their death. However many things which are not forbidden may and should be given up for the health of the body, the practice of virtue, and regular Church discipline. As the Apostle says: 'All things are permitted, but not all are expedient.'</ref>

See also

• Ancient church councils (pre-ecumenical)
• Antinomianism
• Biblical law in Christianity
• Binding and loosing
• Christian ethics
• Circumcision controversy in early Christianity
• Circumcision in the Bible#In rabbinic literature
• Circumcision in the Bible
• Incident at Antioch
• Jewish Christians
• Judaizers
• Legalism (theology)
• New Perspective on Paul
• Pauline Christianity

Further reading

• Badenas, Robert. Christ the End of the Law, Romans 10.4 in Pauline Perspective, 1985 Template:ISBN
• Brown, Raymond E. An Introduction to the New Testament. Anchor Bible Series, 1997. Template:ISBN.
• Bruce, Frederick Fyvie. Peter, Stephen, James and John: Studies in Early Non-Pauline Christianity
• Bruce, Frederick Fyvie. Men and movements in the primitive church: Studies in early non-Pauline Christianity
• Clark, A.C. The Acts of the Apostles, A critical edition with Introduction and Notes on selected passages, Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1933
• Dunn, James D.G. "The Incident at Antioch (Template:Bibleverse)," JSNT 18, 1983, pg 95–122
• Dunn, James D.G. Jesus, Paul and the Law, Template:ISBN
• Dunn, James D.G. The Theology of Paul's Letter to the Galatians 1993 Template:ISBN
• Dunn, James D.G. The Theology of Paul the Apostle Eerdmans 1997 Template:ISBN
• Ehrman, Bart D. Lost Christianities: The Battle for Scripture and the Faiths We Never Knew 2003
• Eisenman, Robert, 1997. James the Brother of Jesus: The Key to Unlocking the Secrets of Early Christianity and the Dead Sea Scrolls. Template:ISBN A cultural historian's dissenting view based on contemporary texts.
• Elsner, Jas. Imperial Rome and Christian Triumph: Oxford History of Early Non-Pauline Christianity 1998 Template:ISBN
• Gaus, Andy. The Unvarnished New Testament 1991 Template:ISBN
• Keener, Craig S. Acts: An Exegetical Commentary: Volume 3, 15:1–23:35. Grand Rapids: Baker, 2014.
• Kim, Seyoon Paul and the New Perspective: Second Thoughts on the Origin of Paul's Gospel 2001 Template:ISBN
• Template:Cite book
• Maccoby, Hyam. The Mythmaker: Paul and the Invention of Christianity. New York: Harper & Row, 1986. Template:ISBN.
• MacDonald, Dennis Ronald, 1983. The Legend and the Apostle: The Battle for Paul in Story and Canon Philadelphia: Westminster Press.
• Metzger, Bruce M. A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament 1975 Template:ISBN
• Mount, Christopher N. Pauline Christianity: Luke-Acts and the Legacy of Paul 2001
• Ropes, J.H., The Text of Acts, Vol. III; The Beginnings of Christianity: Part I: The Acts of the Apostles, London: MacMillan & Co., Ltd., 1926
• Sanders, E.P. Paul and Palestinian Judaism: A Comparison of Patterns of Religion 1977 Template:ISBN
• Sanders, E.P. Paul the Law and the Jewish People 1983
• Sanders, E.P. Jesus and Judaism, Fortress Press, 1987, Template:ISBN
• Savelle, Charles. “A Reexamination of the Prohibitions in Acts 15.” Bibliotheca Ssacra 161 (2004): 449–68.
• Simon, Marcel. The Apostolic Decree and its Setting in the Ancient Church. Bulletin of the John Rylands Library, LII (1969–70), pp. 437–460
• Telfer, W. The Didache and the Apostolic Synod of Antioch The Journal of Theological Studies, 1939, pp. 133–146, 258–271
• Westerholm, Stephen. Perspectives Old and New on Paul: The "Lutheran" Paul and His Critics 2003 Template:ISBN
• Wright, N.T. What Saint Paul Really Said: Was Paul of Tarsus the Real Founder of Christianity? 1997 Template:ISBN

External links

<references group="lower-alpha" />