"... I note, also, that most ancient Mediterranean meals, this group's or any others, usually adhered to - well, to the Mediterranean diet: bread, fish, eggs, olives, oil, cheeses, vegetables. Meat, whether offered to idols or not, was both rare and expensive. And since gentile members of the ekklesia, in order to join the ekklesia, had first to renounce their native gods, the likelihood of their serving idol-meat accordingly diminishes. In short: when Peter and "the rest of the Jews" (Gal 2:13) eventually withdrew from these meals, the menu was unlikely to have been the problem. Crossley on this point disagrees, citing the importance of food for Jewish identity, a position emphasized in other Jewish texts that postulate situations of "mixed eating": Daniel1:3-17; Judith 12:17-19; Tobit 1:11; Aristeas 181. He is absolutely right, but in these stories, the literary social mix is (idealized) Jews-plus-active pagans. In Paul's letter, which reports a real-life social situation, the mix is (historical) Jews-plus-ex-pagan-pagans, the social novum of "eschatological gentiles" produced by the Christ-movement. The likelihood of non-permitted foods being served, I think, again, accordingly diminishes. Crossley also points to Acts 10-11:8 (Peter and Cornelius) and to Romans 14:1-6 as spealdng of and to "the issue of legally permitted foods" as emerging within this messianic movement ab origine. This I question. The passage in Acts 10, an early 2nd-century composition, is not primarily about food: it is (awkwardly) about the incorporation of non-Jews into the Jesus-movement ..."

Fredriksen, Paula Putting Paul in His (Historical) Place: A Response to James Crossley, Margaret Mitchell, and Matthew Novenson (pp. 89-110) Journal of the Jewish Movement in its Jewish Setting, 2018