Did Paul contradict the Jerusalem Council by telling people that they can eat food sacrificed to idols?

The question of whether Paul contradicted the Jerusalem Council arises from the apparent tension between Acts 15 and some of Paul’s later instructions regarding food sacrificed to idols. In Acts 15, the apostles and elders gathered at Jerusalem to decide how Gentile converts should relate to the Mosaic law. After much debate, they wrote to Gentile believers: “that you abstain from what has been sacrificed to idols, and from blood, and from what has been strangled, and from sexual immorality” (Acts 15:29, ESV). That decision seems to plainly prohibit eating food sacrificed to idols. However, Paul later wrote to the Corinthians, “Eat whatever is sold in the meat market without raising any question on the ground of conscience” (1 Corinthians 10:25, ESV). Does this mean Paul contradicted the decision of the Jerusalem Council?

The answer lies in context. The Jerusalem Council aimed primarily to preserve unity between Jewish and Gentile believers in a highly sensitive cultural moment. Jewish Christians, steeped in the law given by God to Israel, were deeply concerned with food purity. For Gentiles to openly eat meat associated with idolatry or ritual impurity would risk alienating Jewish believers and damaging the fellowship of the church. The instructions in Acts 15 were not given as absolute moral legislation for all time but as wise guidance for peace within a diverse body of believers. In fact, Acts 15:28 records the decision as a Spirit-led compromise: “For it has seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to lay on you no greater burden than these requirements.” The restrictions were about promoting holiness and avoiding unnecessary offense.

Paul’s teaching in 1 Corinthians 8–10 reflects this same principle, not a contradiction. He acknowledges that idols are nothing in reality: “We know that ‘an idol has no real existence,’ and that ‘there is no God but one’” (1 Corinthians 8:4, ESV). Since food itself is morally neutral, a believer may technically eat meat that had been sacrificed to idols without spiritual contamination. However, Paul gives an important qualifier: just because one has liberty does not mean he should always exercise it. If eating such food would cause a weaker brother to stumble, Paul insists it must be avoided: “Therefore, if food makes my brother stumble, I will never eat meat, lest I make my brother stumble” (1 Corinthians 8:13, ESV). Similarly, in 1 Corinthians 10:28–29 he warns that if someone points out that the food was offered to idols, the Christian should refrain in love for the other’s conscience.

Paul’s instruction is entirely consistent with the spirit of the Jerusalem Council. Both stress that Christian freedom must be governed by love and concern for others rather than self-interest. The Jerusalem Council highlighted abstaining from food sacrificed to idols because it was a pressing issue for fellowship between Jews and Gentiles in the first-century church. Paul expanded the principle by explaining the theological grounding and the balance between liberty and responsibility. Rather than contradict the Jerusalem Council, Paul affirmed its purpose and showed how it should be lived out in a variety of real-life settings.

The lesson is clear: Christians have freedom in Christ, but that freedom is never to be used selfishly or recklessly. As Paul concludes in 1 Corinthians 10:31–32, “So, whether you eat or drink, or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God. Give no offense to Jews or to Greeks or to the church of God.” Both the Jerusalem Council and Paul himself point believers toward the same goal—living wisely, fleeing idolatry, and walking in love for the sake of Christ and His people.