He makes no mention of Jesus' Galilean ministry, or that he was accompanied by twelve disciples.
Although he refers to Jesus as having been crucified, he offers no information about the time, place and circumstances of the trial and crucifixion described in the Gospels.
and observant Jew (Philemon 3:6, Galatians -14, Acts 22:3-4), fiercely opposed to the new messianic sect founded by Jesus of Nazareth, called the Way (Acts 9:2; Acts ; Acts 19:9, Acts ), which would later become Christianity as we know it; he persecuted Nazarenes (i.e., the first followers of Jesus movement: Acts 24:5) all over the Jewish Diaspora (Acts , 8:1-4, 9:1-2, Acts 9:5, -14, Acts , 22:3-4, 26:9-11, Acts ; 1 Corinthians 15:9; Galatians , Galatians ; Philemon 3:6; 1 Timothy ).
The details of the traditional version of Paul's conversion are from the Book of Acts, believed by many scholars to be primarily a work of fiction.
Meanwhile most of the original twelve Apostles, led by James the Just, stayed in the Roman province of Judea while Peter wavered between the two factions of the sect (Jewish Christians on the right side, and Gentile Christians as the breakaway group) and tried to figure out what to do.
Titus, the son (and eventual successor) of the Roman Emperor Vespasian, solved Peter's problem for him by sacking Jerusalem and razing it to the ground in 70 CE, and scattering/enslaving most of the Jews, including Jewish Christians, leaving Paul's network of Gentile Christian communities intact.
In other words Acts could be nothing more than the 1st to 2nd century equivalent of a Penny Dreadful Dime Novels starring people like Buffalo Bill, "Wild Bill" Hickok, and Annie Oakley i.e. Ronald Reagan being among the soldiers that liberated the Nazi Death camps would be a modern example This makes the Authentic or Early Paul our only truly potentially reliable source regarding the historical Paul.
So if the seven epistles credited to Paul are our only truly potentially reliable source regarding a historical Paul what can be said about him?