I have to state that I do not think that a mere two or three years separates Jesus and the beginnings of Paul. I feel that the times between the life and mission of Jesus and a Johnny come lately reformed secular Jew named Saul, aka Paul of Tarsus, runs more in a twenty to thirty year timeframe before Paul started and morphed into his resurrected mission of Jesus.
That while some stories in the Acts of the Apostles may be true, some are fabricated for the sake of building a bridge document to connect Paul directly to Jesus and his timeline.
Not only do I not believe that Paul was in a timeline with Peter and his post Jesus mission, I believe that the reference to James, the Brother of Jesus, was plagiarized straight out of Josephus Flavius’ histories of the Jews. That would set the whole timeline and authorship of the Acts of the Apostles back a considerable amount of time like to when Jospehus finished his then history best sellers.
The destruction of the great Temple in 70 A.D., C.E., sent a shockwave into Judaism felt to this day. It would be no surprise that in reconstructing an obscure Jesus and his mission, certain writers took liberties both with facts and or the truth using plagiarism amongst their tools to sell and market the current revised Jesus product.
So important is Josephus’s histories as a tangible proof of the existence of a Jewish State and its Fall, that the second fall of Jerusalem in 135 A.D. and Hadrian’s holocaust of the Jews then is barely noticed because it, the event, has little to none written documentation on the topic. If not in print, it did not happen?
A documentary trail from Jesus to Paul does not seem to me to match a logical timeline of events.
These assumed nineteenth century timelines regarding the Scriptures need radical realignment in the twenty-first century.