Amillennialists...Here's a chance to state your case.

garee in Acts 21:18-26 (about ad57,,27 years after the Cross) James Paul and the others are still following the law of Moses and making offerings in the temple as if they saw it as still valid(your saying the opposite of what the apostles actions are)...

Well, the issue between free will vs omniscience is a contentious issue among Christian and non Christians alike. So you can disagree politely but you chose not to.

Paul said that to the Jews he became a Jew so that he might win some to Christ. The apostles fully understood that the Old Covenant was finished when Christ died on the cross. At the same time they were willing to accommodate those saved Jews who had not fully transitioned to the New Covenant understanding of things. The book of Acts is a transitional book.

But the epistles of the apostles to all the churches (which included Jews and Gentiles) clarified the meaning of the New Covenant, and the epistle to the Hebrews was written specifically to show Hebrew Christians the difference between the Old and New Covenants.

HEBREWS 13
10 We have an altar, whereof they have no right to eat which serve the tabernacle.
11 For the bodies of those beasts, whose blood is brought into the sanctuary by the high priest for sin, are burned without the camp.
12 Wherefore Jesus also, that he might sanctify the people with his own blood, suffered without the gate.
13 Let us go forth therefore unto him without the camp, bearing his reproach.
14 For here have we no continuing city, but we seek one to come.

Yes as if they saw it as a valid shadow . It lost its validity as a shadow when Jesus said it is finished .The veil was rent signaling our bloody Husband Christ had been cut off as the father bruised him for our iniquities. .

Paul was teaching against the law of the fathers a false zeal for knowing God .They insisted the reformation had not come and that the ceremonial laws were more than shadows . They sought after what the eyes see as a sign and evil generation (no faith) . Proving confirming they were walking by sight by murdering the misperceived competition as if we did wrestle against flesh and blood . They were now are looking to put Paul 6 feet under, as in out of sight out of mind (no faith)

The ceremony the believer spoke of would seems to of been a Nazarene vow which ends when the head is shaven .It seemed to be one of personal desire, no length of time, or length hair . Paul apparently had finished his

Acts 18:18And Paul after this tarried there yet a good while, and then took his leave of the brethren, and sailed thence into Syria, and with him Priscilla and Aquila; having shorn his head in Cenchrea: for he had a vow.

Acts 21:23-24 Do therefore this that we say to thee: We have four men which have a vow on them; Them take, and purify thyself with them, and be at charges with them, that they may shave their heads: and all may know that those things, whereof they were informed concerning thee, are nothing; but that thou thyself also walkest orderly, and keepest the law.

Above I believe the nothing as to a working affect profits as a shadow But that we keep our guard the moral law , not the ceremonial law which are nothing as substance.

Yes, my view is that James the Brother of Jesus, did not agree with Paul about the gospel of grace. He believes that the Jews should continue under the gospel of the kingdom, which requires faith and works.

However he did agree that gentiles are fully under the gospel of grace as acts 21 indicated. That is the context of Galatians 2

Which faith and works? Because shortly after James was written (62-69AD), their Temple was destroyed preventing any Jew to be saved by the works of the law...No priesthood, no sacrifices, no Temple etc., they couldn't possiby keep the law as prescribed by Moses.

And I was thinking the whole time that the apostles didn't understand Jesus was going to die like we discussed a few pages back and that Peter said "no Lord" when he was told to go to Cornelius(a gentile Acts 10 ect.) and that he was told to do it "nothing doubting" and then did. Then the others had a long talk with him about going into an gentiles house and eating with them. And then they all met in Acts 15:6 to "consider of this matter" of if they should be circumcised and follow the law or not. Which doesn't seem as if the apostles understood that the law was over at all at that time if we follow the acts of the apostles.

Are you saying Jews after 70 AD decided that it is only faith that will save them? They still believe in doing works to complete their faith.

James was written before Acts 15 and to the Jews scattered abroad, and he emphasized to them in the famous chapter 2, that their faith are to be shown thru their works.

Peter obviously did not get the memo, as recorded in Acts 10.

I'm not MAD my friend...

I am not saying you are. I am sharing with you my views

The main benefit of being a MAD is that you can take the Bible as its plain text, instead of having to struggle with Mark 16:16, Acts 2:38 etc etc.

I'm post trib.,pre wrath,pre mill. but more similar to the apostolic church fathers so rather well out side the main stream camps...

There was some confusion and double-mindedness on that point, hence the Council at Jerusalem.

Believing Jews have never decided anything except what is written in Scripture.
They believe faith issues in good works and that it's faith from beginning to end.

Romans 1:17 NKJV
[17] For in it the righteousness of God is revealed from faith to faith; as it is written, "The just shall live by faith."

Yes, but that is not the same as you claim, ..."They still believe in doing works to complete their faith".

Poor Peter seems to have born the brunt of being forced to step outside the camps I think about then, lol he was saying no Lord, he was defending himself against his own camp so to speak(they argued with him over Acts 10) and Paul was coming into the picture all at the same time. lol,At some point I just threw my hands up and thought who cares which camps right,I just want to know...

Interesting, I will be most keen to know whether Jews nowadays, do they follow the Apostle Paul's letters regarding church doctrine from Romans to Philemon?

I would think they ignore almost all of it since it will be awkward for them when they read Romans 9-11, for example.

So when you say they follow Scripture, do you mean the OT only?

oops,,,we had a thead like that once and a guy named Naarden kept blabbering on about the difference between Zionist and Orthodox Jews,lol

Peter did not get many things right the first time. That does not mean that he did not know. It is one thing to know, and another thing to fully accept.

So when you stated that the 12 "fully understood", do you think you are reading into the Bible?

I said 'believing Jews', meaning Jews who believe ALL THEIR Scriptures (they wrote the NT as well) in which both testify to their One Messiah.