Acts 21 proves that the Apostle Paul was a false teacher

their faith in Christ fully established, or just their belief in him?We cannot know but why would they have only a belief in him while hanging out with the apostles? The NT belief from Act on is everything. Belief is the faith. If those Jews who were arguing for the observance of the Law had any solid faith in Jesus and in his sacrifice, why did they feel they needed to obey the Law? It really didn't sense.That is correct. It would not make sense for someone with Pauline doctrine in their belief system to keep the law. That is why no Christian keeps the law now for the most part. That is the whole point of the inconsistency that I am pointing out in Acts 21. What you are missing is this: The early believers in Jesus as in the Jews under the guidance of the early apostles kept the law because the law was the teaching and instruction of God as given to Moses - the Torah. To not keep the law was to be a lawbreaker, a sinner. Instead of asking why they would keep the law, a better question would be why wouldn't they? The fact that they were and James was happy about it should speak roaring volumes. They had no intentions of neglecting the law just because the Messiah had come. They already knew the law was to be kept forever: "… the things revealed belong to us and to our children forever, that we may follow all the words of this law" (Deuteronomy 29:29). The Messiah coming did not bring an end to "forever." Hence the decision of the Apostles and Older men as announced in Acts 15, where they only "saved" three elements of the Alw as necessary to observe. Not the whole law. No one claims that salvation comes by believing in Jesus and observing three elements of the law. Have you heard that in any church? Now, that really does not make sense. Either highly edited or Peter was mistaken. I have already shown you through the scripture at Acts 15, that in saying that the Jews should refrain from relying on works of law for salvation Paul was not teaching a different kind of Christianity.I have never said that that Jews were relying on keeping the law for salvation in the NT. We are talking about believing Jews, ones who kept the law after believing because the law was their standard of righteousness. It is the only standard of righteousness in the Bible outside of Paul's teachings. Where does it say that they were learning form other Apostles to keep the Law? If believing in Jesus means you no longer need to keep the law , please explain why the apostles did not teach the Jews this in Jerusalem? Instead of giving me some obscure insconsistent passages from Acts 15, take me on the guided tour of the NT epistles where someone besides Paul taught that salvation comes by believing and now breaking that perfect, forever law was now completely okay? Even James does not at any point in the scripture at Acts 21, say that it was necessary to keep the law, though at that time it was still possible to.James does not need to say the words "Now that you all believe in Christ, it is necessary to keep the law." Why did he not need to say that? Because they were already keeping it. He was just giddy about it! It was hearing the rumors of Paul not keeping it that had him and the others concerned. Also, where does it say that the other Apostles in Jerusalem were keeping the law? Of course they were and they expected Paul to. Again, they asked Paul to do this ritual; "Then everybody will know there is no truth in these reports about you, but that you yourself are living in obedience to the law" (Acts 21:24). Why would they expect Paul to do something that was obsolete and no longer necessary? You still have not answered. Incidentally, where in that whole chapter does James actually tell Paul he is wrong? Are you looking for the words "Paul, you are wrong."? No, that is not there but Acts 21 is all about them believing that Paul was wrong.