The Council of Jerusalem still proves nothing in regards to Peter being the first “pope”.
All this about Peter doing this, that, and the other thing behind the scenes is just nonsense. Without reading way more into the passage than is said, there’s no way anyone could get the Catholic interpretation of the papacy and justification for it out of that passage.
Peter never referred once in his letter(s) to what Catholics claim for him. He never left specific instructions on how to choose his alleged successor. All Catholics have to go on is his impulsive, ill conceived idea on how to replace Judas, which the apostles were never instructed to do. He acted in the flesh, without the leading of the Holy Spirit.
To base a whole doctrine on that event of questionable validity is foolhardy.
If Peter really did receive from Jesus the office of the first pope and if the Catholic church wrote the Bible, why wasn’t it included in the canon of Scripture if it was so critical a truth? Surely God would have left clearer instructions for what Catholics consider the one true church to maintain its integrity.
How else would the head of the Roman Church assert his claim to being a “first among equals” without inventing an unbroken line from Peter?