The term you use, “Jewish Law,” is ambiguous.
Jews were known to follow both Torah, and the true “Jewish Law,” the Takanot and Ma’asim of the Pharisees.
Even the terms “commandments,” and “ordinances” can be ambiguous, and it is necessary to carefully examine the text in many cases, especially in Paul’s epistles.
In the case of James, it is safe to infer that he spoke of true Torah based acts of love arising out of spiritually guided faith. Its just not that easy with Paul, as his writings covered a much more vast array of human actions.
When he spoke to the Galatians he was clearly speaking of the pollutions injected by the Pharisees, but when he spoke to the Corinthians in chapter 11, he was very obviously speaking of the commandments that he personally taught them.
.
You can go “safe to infer” all you want. Besides, it doesn’t say it didn’t happen right?
I didn't use it. The poster I was responding to did.
Thank you; I intended no ambiguity. The reference was to circumcision, but by extension we can mention any Jewish ceremonial practice of the Law of Moses, which we know, do not save. I don’t think St. Paul made any distinctions of the kind that you do, — am I wrong in that regard?