Mary
Your post is so filled with innacuracies of what I said that it is too much for me to address them.
Since the Bible account is not good enough for you, i did look at a few commentaries. Here is one:
Paul is arrested in Jerusalem
I also looked at commentaries from notable scholars like Coffman, Henry and a few others. They bear witness of what I said. James was the leader of the Church at Jerusalem, they were all zealous for the law and were looking for Paul to show he also followed the law. They all note that they had the same concerns and distain as the Jews from Asia. The only thing they don't comment on is the FACT (not opinion) that they stirred up the whole city including the many thousands of Jews that believed. One commentator even wondered why help wasn't sought from some of them that were purified.
But they all agreed that the actions of James and the elders was wrong and lead to his arrest. They vary on how hard they are on James and the believing Jews from simply "in error" to "bitter" and [paraphrasing] "unable to be cured" from the law.
So the obly thing they did not do was say the believers were involved in the actual murder plot and beating. That however is what the Bible suggests when it says all the city was stirred up.
Originally I did insinuate that they were directly involved. I later clarified that point. The bottom line is that they were of like mind with the Jews from Asia.
1 Cor 1 has nothing to do with Paul and James and your interpetation makes me wonder if you've read the whole epistle. It has nothing to do with the controversy between James and Paul (which all the commentators I mentioned agree with me that there was controversy). Paul had controveries with James, John Mark, Barnabus, Peter and Titus. In the end it all worked out. But to suggest that 1 cor 1 says everyone always agreed and always spoke the same thi g is absolutely wrong. It also shows a lack of understanding of the book of corinthians. It had nothing to do with disputes of doctrine which Paul had no problems taking on that fight.
Why are we discussing Acts 21? To show that James and Paul actually disagreed on the law and works being required for salvation. It is literally impossible to state Paul believed works are needed and it is equally impossible to say James believed in faith without works.
This debate didn't start a mere 500 years ago. It started circa 48 AD at the council at Jerusalem and persisted until both men ceased from writing.