The Council at Jerusalem - Acts chapter 15

brother acts gives you a record of Paul’s missionary journeys , the Galatians church is established by Paul during his journeys throughout the book of acts until his imprisonment in rome

havent you noticed acts 10 forward is basically a record of Paul and the apostles lives and establishment of the church ? Acts is the record and order the epistles are the letters written by the apostles during and after the book of acts

To understand it of what oil says in his epistles we can read e accounts of his life in acts because often he’s reflecting back on those events like his conversion see if you follow Paul’s missions in acts you have a record of where he went and what he did and where he ended up even what he was preaching

he gives testimony under oath concerning his conversion and doctrine but you can actually follow his journeys and are the timeline a few churches were planted by Paul and his many companions like Luke , mark , barnabus , Apollos , Timothy ect

and other churches were planted by Peter and John and the other chosen witnesses just as Paul was

it doesn’t matter who preaches the gospel if it’s the gospel they are preaching the same things Paul’s no different from Peter but as to your objection there , you can follow Paul’s journeys in acts and come to a resolution of it Yourself if you actually object
peter wrote to them also

“Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, to the strangers scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia,”
‭‭1 Peter‬ ‭1:1‬ ‭KJV‬‬

Some of the churches started through Paul and Barnabas' ministry in Acts 14, prior to the council in Jerusalem, were in the province of Galatia. The Romans moved the border northward such that the province did not include some of those cities in the 200's. Some of the Bible scholars in the 1800's were unaware of this. Even some Bible-themed maps from the era use the later Roman borders and do not include these first-missionary journey churches in the province of Galatia.

Paul labeling audiences based on their location like this is consistent with Paul's other terminology. Of course, this does not along prove the earlier date for the epistle. But notice the evidence he gives in his argument on the circumcision issue includes not even Titus, a Greek, being compelled to be circumcised. The other apostles not requiring circumcision is a much, much weaker argument than all the apostles agreeing that Gentiles did not need to be circumcised and writing the Gentiles a letter about it. It's a bit of an argument of silence, but a very glaring silence that Paul would not include the Jerusalem council decision as part of his argument in Galatians.

The fact some 1800's liberal Germans theory of James and Paul having different ideas of the Gospel rely on the later dating. That alone does not prove the earlier dating. But the earlier dating does seem to fit the content of the epistle better. Insisting on the later date does seem to rest on the poor historical/archeological understanding of what actually constituted Galatia in Acts 15.

Is this verse supposed to provide evidence for a later dating of Galatians? If so, I don't get your point.

Hello Grace_ambassador.
I appreciate the work you pit into this post. I get what you're saying.
It can be difficult to understand the apostles writings (especially Paul), as the early church was all Jewish, but as they went along as missionaries to gentiles, a clash of cultures ensued, despite the holy Spirit indwelling them.
Christs' disciples were very kind in how they treated this matter. Paul said,

I am convinced, being fully persuaded in the Lord Jesus, that nothing is unclean in itself. But if anyone regards something as unclean, then for that person it is unclean. f your brother or sister is distressed because of what you eat, you are no longer acting in love. Do not by your eating destroy someone for whom Christ died. Rom.14:14-15

Acts 21:19-21 is also a good example of supporting Jews who love Jesus and our Lord also taught,

No man also having drunk old wine straightway desireth new: for he saith, The old is better. Lk.5:39

Jesus was referring to the Jewish perception of law.

Yes, James fully understood how his half Brother loved those who hurt him terribly.
Thereis no written record of how he died, but traditionally he was martyred. I think it's a good bet he was, so he certainly would have understood the liberty of forgiving those who hated him.

Hello Pilgrimshope.
I've been looking at the scriptures this way,

there is one that accuseth you, even Moses, in whom ye trust. Jn.5:45

He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him:
the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day. Jn.12:48

There is no condemnation where there is no accusation. Among other things, Moses will accuse the religious leaders who wanted Jesus dead, provided they didn't repent of this great sin, as our Lord spoke.

Does that make sense?

It doesn't make any difference which epistle was written 1st. Acts 15 & Gal 2 are written by different people. Both made the Bible & are therefore Holy Spirit inspired (2 Tim 3:16).

Thread focus is what happened at ""The Council at Jerusalem""

The message/letters the Christ believing apostles' & elders at the Jerusalem assembly, sent to the Christ believing gentile churches. Cite the same thing, adherence to circumcision & keeping Mosaic law. We're not requirements that NT believers had to adhere to.

On an agreed upon handshake, the believing apostles' & elders were to focus/on ministering to Jews that were under Mosaic covenant. Paul & Barnabas were to go witness/evangelize the gentiles that weren't under the Mosaic law covenant.

These two ministries were operational until the Temple is destroyed in 70 A.D. At that time only Paul's message (no difference between Jew or Gentile) remained.

The dividing point between the 2 covenants/testaments is Jesus' death & resurrection. See death of the testator: Hebrews 9:12-26, verses 16 & 17 in particular.

The last paragraph above seems to be referring to the 'right hand of fellowship' mentioned in Galatians, and setting it at the time of the Jerusalem council. If Galatians was written before the council, that is not how it went down.

The 11 apostles still had the commission from Christ to minister to the nations. While Peter had a focus on Jews and Paul and Gentiles, Peter still had that commission from Christ. In Acts 15, he points out that he had preached the gospel to Gentiles.

I'm not sure your view, but this reminds me of hyperdispensationalism. Like Paul says about salvation for Jews and Gentiles, "There is no difference." The teachings of Peter and John on salvation are valid for Gentiles, also. There are not two Gospels. And what Peter, John, and Paul taught about Jews is still valid today.

yes brother look here the accusation was written down

“Take this book of the law,

and put it at the side of the ark of the covenant of the LORD your God,

that it may be there for a witness against thee.”
‭‭Deuteronomy‬ ‭31:26‬ ‭KJV‬‬

That’s the Old Testament law it’s made to witness against all sinners Moses as you were saying his law is an accusation against sinners that’s it’s purpose to make one aware of and Toni life each sin to bring guilt before God

“Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God.”
‭‭Romans‬ ‭3:19‬ ‭KJV‬‬

see how the law witnesses against sinners ? And how we’re all sinners proven by the law ?

the New Testament removes the witness against us at Gods side and Jesus has replaced the accusations against with intercession advocation for us no longer against us

so as you read there the book of Moses law was placed at the side of e ark next to the mercy seat where Gods glory appeared for the purpose of bieng a witness against the transgressors

the new testsment has made this the case The witness against us is removed

“And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses; blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;

Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days: which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ.”
‭‭Colossians‬ ‭2:13-14, 16-17‬ ‭KJV‬‬

Moses law was only a foreshadowing of the gospel when Jesus removed the witness against us he was then seated at Gods right hand not to witness against us as Moses law did but for this purpose the opposite purpose to advocate for those already proven sinners beforehand and bring them to repentance

so at Gods side now is no witness against us

“Who is he that condemneth? It is Christ that died, yea rather, that is risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us.”
‭‭Romans‬ ‭8:34‬ ‭

“Wherefore he is able also to save them to the uttermost that come unto God by him, seeing he ever liveth to make intercession for them.”
‭‭Hebrews‬ ‭7:25‬ ‭

Jesus isn’t saying “ they sinned thier guilty and must die because they sinned “ that’s a witness against us it’s this

the law says “ Thou shalt not commit adultery “ then it accuses anyone who’s committed adultery and condemns to n to death

“And the man that committeth adultery with another man's wife, even he that committeth adultery with his neighbour's wife, the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death.”
‭‭Leviticus‬ ‭20:10‬ ‭KJV‬‬

this causes the people also to accuse each other and it was their hands who killed the other sinners here’s another great example

“And while the children of Israel were in the wilderness, they found a man that gathered sticks upon the sabbath day.

And the LORD said unto Moses, The man shall be surely put to death: all the congregation shall stone him with stones without the camp. And all the congregation brought him without the camp, and stoned him with stones, and he died; as the LORD commanded Moses.”
‭‭Numbers‬ ‭15:32, 35-36‬

mose law is designed to point out what sin is . And impute it’s to the bearers conscience not makes them aware “ I’ve sinned and I’m condemned by the law I’m lost without hope who shall save me now ?”

that is the function of the law because Christ is of no value to someone who isn’t aware of or doesn’t acknowledge thier own sins he can’t help someone who won’t acknowledge e truth of thier own sins

the law was given to make the world know they are all guilty before God and they all need his salvstion or they are doomed

the witness against us is meant to bring us to the gospel where we then find gods eternal truths and gain an advocate who’s forbus always advocating for our forgiveness and salvstion rather than having a book written in stone that can never have a single word changed and all sinners must be killed by the others ….

it’s really the law is a let of the plan of redemption it’s part is to bring mankind to thier knees before him so he can begin to life us up and we will then know without him we are nothing

here’s the thing this is all your own conclusions

The Romans moved the border northward such that the province did not include some of those cities in the 200's. Some of the Bible scholars in the 1800's were unaware of this. Even some Bible-themed maps from the era use the later Roman borders and do not include these first-missionary journey churches in the province of Galatia.

Paul labeling audiences based on their location like this is consistent with Paul's other terminology. Of course, this does not along prove the earlier date for the epistle. But notice the evidence he gives in his argument on the circumcision issue includes not even Titus, a Greek, being compelled to be circumcised. The other apostles not requiring circumcision is a much, much weaker argument than all the apostles agreeing that Gentiles did not need to be circumcised and writing the Gentiles a letter about it. It's a bit of an argument of silence, but a very glaring silence that Paul would not include the Jerusalem council decision as part of his argument in Galatians.

The fact some 1800's liberal Germans theory of James and Paul having different ideas of the Gospel rely on the later dating. That alone does not prove the earlier dating. But the earlier dating does seem to fit the content of the epistle better. Insisting on the later date does seem to rest on the poor historical/archeological understanding of what actually constituted Galatia in Acts 15.

all
Of that is just you thinking and none of it is in scriptire what I was saying to you is you can follow where Paul went what Paul did and know for yourself without parting from scriptire and thinking about how this or that could be instead it’s already written down

my point is it doesn’t matter which apostle preached the gospel or of the audience was Jew or gentile there’s no difference in hearing what Paul preached and what Peter John and the others preached

they were all writing to the same group the one chi rich made of both Jew and gentile the idea that Paul had some different ministry is what I’m talking about.

“For I am the least of the apostles, that am not meet to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God. But by the grace of God I am what I am: and his grace which was bestowed upon me was not in vain; but I laboured more abundantly than they all: yet not I, but the grace of God which was with me. Therefore whether it were I or they, so we preach, and so ye believed.”
‭‭1 Corinthians‬ ‭15:9-11‬ ‭KJV‬‬

Paul is not different from any other apostle is my point he preached to Jew and gentile to same gospel thre others were preaching to Jew and gentile

the idea that the apostles decided “ only Paul can preach to gentiles “ is erroneous

Peters second epistle

“And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you;”
‭‭2 Peter‬ ‭3:15‬ ‭KJV‬‬

they were preaching and writing to the same people the same message Peter accepted Paul as an apostle just as Paul accepted oeter and the others as apostles theres just one church it consists of all believers Jew or gentile and it doesn’t matter which apostle one hears and believes thier role is to witness the truth of the gospel to all the world

Paul is a servant and witness of Jesus like Peter is all of thier letters are for anyone that believes but tonthe point paul was no different from anyone else who was chosen to be a witness by Jesus

truthfully it doesn’t matter whether the Galatians church was established before or after the council Paul went there seeking the approval of the apostles over his doctrine and the subject of whether the law of Moses was part of Christian doctrine or not

it’s not as if Peter eas preaching Moses law and Paul wasnt anything

and it’s certainly not as of Paul had some other ministry or other gospel they were all spreading the gospel everywhere they went the eleven remained around Jerusalem at first to finish doing what Jesus told them Paul eas no dofferent he also preached to Jew and gentile the same gospel even until his death he accepted anyone Jew or gentile who would hear him

“And when they had appointed him a day, there came many to him into his lodging; to whom he expounded ( to the Jews ) and testified the kingdom of God, persuading them concerning Jesus, both out of the law of Moses, and out of the prophets, from morning till evening. And some believed the things which were spoken, and some believed not.

( Paul then quotes Isaiah about osraels blindness and says now salvstion is sent to gentiles and they will hear it )

And Paul dwelt two whole years in his own hired house, and received all that came in unto him, preaching the kingdom of God, and teaching those things which concern the Lord Jesus Christ, with all confidence, no man forbidding him.”
‭‭Acts‬ ‭28:23-24, 30-31‬ ‭KJV‬‬

The entire idea that Jew and gentile are different or require different doctrine in Christ is a red herring

yes it does if you look closely at what Jesus is saying here

“Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me. And ye will not come to me, that ye might have life.

.. Do not think that I will accuse you to the Father: there is one that accuseth you, even Moses, in whom ye trust.

For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me: for he wrote of me. But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words?”
‭‭John‬ ‭5:39-40, 45-47‬ ‭

now consider what I was saying Moses wrote this about Jesus if we believe it we’re going to go to Jesus and know his words are Gods requirement

“The LORD thy God will raise up unto thee a Prophet from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me; ( Moses is saying this ) unto him ye shall hearken; ( of Jesus whom would later be raised up from among men of Israel )

according to all that thou desiredst of the LORD thy God in Horeb in the day of the assembly, saying, Let me not hear again the voice of the LORD my God, neither let me see this great fire any more, that I die not. ( they begged God to stop speaking and so he promised Christ would come later )

( God speaking to Moses )

“ I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him.

And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of him.”
‭‭Deuteronomy‬ ‭18:15-16, 18-19‬

Jesus is the one he sent is the thing to fulfill what Moses said there Peter confirms it afterwards so we have a pre present and post witness

See how Peter hearkens us back to that scriptire ?

“For Moses truly said unto the fathers, A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your brethren, like unto me; him shall ye hear in all things whatsoever he shall say unto you. And it shall come to pass, that every soul, which will not hear that prophet, shall be destroyed from among the people. Yea, and all the prophets from Samuel and those that follow after, as many as have spoken, have likewise foretold of these days.”
‭‭Acts‬ ‭3:22-24‬ ‭

and then You have Moses words

will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him.

And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of him.”

And jesus words

“He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day. For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak. And I know that his commandment is life everlasting: whatsoever I speak therefore, even as the Father said unto me, so I speak.”
‭‭John‬ ‭12:48-50‬ ‭KJV‬‬

and peters confirmation of the promise of Abraham and spreading of the gospel to all nations

“Ye are the children of the prophets, and of the covenant which God made with our fathers, saying unto Abraham, And in thy seed shall all the kindreds of the earth be blessed.

Unto you first God, having raised up his Son Jesus, sent him to bless you, in turning away every one of you from his iniquities.”
‭‭Acts‬ ‭3:25-26‬ ‭KJV‬‬

and then all the many many other prophecies and epistles which support the same notions Jesus is the one the old testsment was always promising he’s the one who God sent to speak his own words to earth because Jesus is God made flesh what came from his mouth is what will judge us it’s why he makes the at point

” the words I have spoken will judge those who reject me and my words “

but also he’s made The point Of those who hear and believe his words and don’t reject him

“For the Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgment unto the Son: Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.”
‭‭John‬ ‭5:22, 24‬ ‭KJV‬‬

salvstion is whether we accept Jesus and his word or reject Jesus who even Moses succeeded his authority to beforehand

The threads focus - The Council at Jerusalem - & what happened there.

Jerusalem assembly apostles Peter, James & John & elders (OP - vs 6 & 9) confirm in writing (OP - vs 23 & 29)

Paul's message that new covenant believing gentiles (or Jews). DON'T have to adhere to the Covenant of Circumcision nor the Mosaic covenant (OP - vs 24).

Which means believers today: DON'T have to adhere to the Covenant of Circumcision nor the Mosaic covenant

presidente, below are 3 Bible versions (there are more) that headline Galatians chapter 2 - The Council at Jerusalem - Links provided.

Moses, Jesus/Matthew & Paul. By a WITNESS of 2 or 3: Deut 19:15, Matt 18:16, 2 Cor 13:1, 1 Tim 5:19

Here's 3 versions that headline Galatians chapter 2 - The Council at Jerusalem - Links provided.

Amplified Bible
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Galatians+2&version=AMP

New American Standard Bible
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Galatians+2&version=AMP

New Catholic Bible
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Galatians+2&version=NCB

The apostle James, known as 'James the greater' was actually alive when Barnabas and Saul/Paul went to Jerusalem in Acts 9.

presidente, below are 3 Bible versions (there are more) that headline Galatians chapter 2 - The Council at Jerusalem - Links provided.

Moses, Jesus/Matthew & Paul. By a WITNESS of 2 or 3: Deut 19:15, Matt 18:16, 2 Cor 13:1, 1 Tim 5:19

Here's 3 versions that headline Galatians chapter 2 - The Council at Jerusalem - Links provided.

Amplified Bible
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Galatians+2&version=AMP

New American Standard Bible
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Galatians+2&version=AMP

New Catholic Bible
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Galatians+2&version=NCB[/QUOTE]
That doesn't prove your theory. It just shows that some Bible translators...or less qualified editors... like to come down on one side or another of a theological/historical issue when that isn't their job and when it isn't necessary. The section titles are not part of the actual Greek text. It is something the translators or editors add to the Biblical text. Some readers ignorantly treat it like scripture. In this case, the section title is propped up by a bit of bad arechological/historical assumption from the 1800's-- a misunderstanding of what constituted 'Galatia', and the fact that Paul and Barnabas initially preached in Galatia in Acts 13-14 prior to the council.

That doesn't prove your theory. It just shows that some Bible translators...or less qualified editors... like to come down on one side or another of a theological/historical issue when that isn't their job and when it isn't necessary. The section titles are not part of the actual Greek text. It is something the translators or editors add to the Biblical text. Some readers ignorantly treat it like scripture. In this case, the section title is propped up by a bit of bad arechological/historical assumption from the 1800's-- a misunderstanding of what constituted 'Galatia', and the fact that Paul and Barnabas initially preached in Galatia in Acts 13-14 prior to the council.[/QUOTE]

You're free to promote whatever you chose. I'll chose the 3 known translations over a faceless unknown poster on a forum. May His grace be multiplied to you & yours. FD

That doesn't prove your theory. It just shows that some Bible translators...or less qualified editors... like to come down on one side or another of a theological/historical issue when that isn't their job and when it isn't necessary. The section titles are not part of the actual Greek text. It is something the translators or editors add to the Biblical text. Some readers ignorantly treat it like scripture. In this case, the section title is propped up by a bit of bad arechological/historical assumption from the 1800's-- a misunderstanding of what constituted 'Galatia', and the fact that Paul and Barnabas initially preached in Galatia in Acts 13-14 prior to the council.[/QUOTE]

James, the brother of John, the author of the book of James, was killed in Acts 12.

You're free to promote whatever you chose. I'll chose the 3 known translations over a faceless unknown poster on a forum. May His grace be multiplied to you & yours. FD[/QUOTE]
They weren't translating anything from the Greek there, and you do not know that the translators put in the section titles.

James, the brother of John, the author of the book of James, was killed in Acts 12.[/QUOTE]
He was alive in Acts 9 when Barnabas was with Paul in Jerusalem and met the apostles there.

He was alive in Acts 9 when Barnabas was with Paul in Jerusalem and met the apostles there.[/QUOTE]

Where does it mentioned that he met with James? He met with James, the Lord's brother, but not James of Zebedee.

To my fellow faceless unnamed poster, this is also an issue that has been discusssed and debated in various theological journals. https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0,11&q=south+galatian+hypothesis&btnG=

An editor of a Bible translation slapping a section title on a section doesn't prove anything.

It does not say which James in Galatians 2, but it is possible that James, Cephas, and John, the 'pillars' included James the son of Zebedee. In the Gospels, when the apostles weren't showing the right attitude, James and John may have been positioning themselves for high leadership roles in the coming kingdom, something Peter may not have liked. But Jesus let James and John know that it was up to the Father as to who would sit on his right hand or on his left.

Apparently John managed to sit to Jesus right at the Lord's Supper. They probably leaned on their left elbows laying down, and John was in a position to lean on Jesus chest to ask who would betray him.

James may have been older than John. He might have been perceived by some as the leader, and that may be why Herod had him put to death. So listing James, Cephas, and John as those who seemed to be pillars, who Paul communicated with 'privately to them that were of reputation', makes sense. James may have seemed by many to have had the reputation of leader, followed by Cephas and John. These three were also the ones with Jesus on the mount of transfiguration. Peter and John spent time together, ministering in the temple. James and John may have been missionary-journey partners when they were sent out in Matthew 10, since they are grouped in twos and elsewhere we read they were sent out two by two.

Notice that Acts 15 does not show Paul and Barnabas going up secretly to discuss the issue. There is a dispute in Antioch. It seems likely given the 'open floor' (as opposed to closed pulpit) style of meeting of the early church, the dispute could have happened in a church meeting. Then they get to Jerusalem, and there is a meeting of the church... again public. Then there is a meeting of the apostles and elders...which sounds like it was a large meeting. The results were quite public.

It is a difficult problem. We know Paul was preaching. He already had a call on him to minister to Gentiles. But this indicates that they were either doing ministry, or had a desire to do it, that involved preaching to Gentiles prior to Peter going to Cornelius' house. We know Paul had been preaching in Damascus prior to this. It could be their Gentile conversion efforts had not met with success and Acts 10 with Peter was the first big breakthrough... but that the so-called 'pillars' recognized grace was on Paul and Barnabas for this. There were prophets in the church and Peter had a visionary experience and an experience with an angel. Maybe they knew of the grace for Gentile ministry by spiritual means if there were no track record yet.

And it could be that Peter had not seen this grace in his own life until Acts 10. He may have needed that push to get past Pharisaical restrictions on actually connecting with Gentiles to fulfill the commission in Matthew 28. He had a vision and the Spirit spoke to him, and finally he preached to Gentiles. This may have broadened his view of his ministry beyond just the circumcision.

A difficult passage is this verse from Acts 15:
7 And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men and brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe.

I suppose Peter could have said that if Paul and Barnabas had actually won Gentile converts over, but Peter's caused a bit of controversy since he had entered a Gentile home baptized Gentiles and the circumcision group did not like that at the time, and since it was a big deal they remembered, he could speak of it in this way. Philip had already ministered to Samaritans. Did they count as Gentiles, or a fuzzy in between group-- Jewish proselyte heretics maybe?

If Paul and Barnabas had just __preached__ to Gentiles or knew they were supposed to partly because of Paul's revelation(s), it would also make sense for Peter to say this.

They weren't translating anything from the Greek there, and you do not know that the translators put in the section titles.[/QUOTE]

I never claimed their titles were scripture. Having, said that every Bible we read is a translation. I simply believe the writers of those 3 Bibles are a better source then you.

Additionally, when I read Acts & Gal I see the same event. How about we throw Gal out of the conversation.

And return to the focus the OP: Acts 15 - The Council at Jerusalem

Synopsis:

Jerusalem assembly apostles Peter, James & the elders (OP - vs 6 & 9) confirm in writing (OP - vs 23 & 29)

Paul's message that new covenant believing gentiles (or Jews).

DON'T have to adhere to the Covenant of Circumcision nor the Mosaic covenant (OP - vs 24).

Which means believers today: DON'T have to adhere to the Covenant of Circumcision nor the Mosaic covenant.

Not being under the Covenant of Circumcision nor the Mosaic covenant. Doesn't mean NT assembly is void of any personal responsibility.

You're not under law you're under grace (Rom 6:14)

By grace are you saved thru faith & not of yourself works (Eph 2:8-9)

The message/gospel by which you are saved is. Christ died for your sins was buried & rose from the grave 3 days later (1 Cor 15:1-4)

Once they understand what really matters. I done!

It's the Holy Spirits job to lead them from there.

I'm confident that the good work Holy Spirit began. Will guide them until the day of Jesus Christ. (Phil 1:6)