Why not just honestly admit that the evidence for early Christianity is so sparse and so ambiguous that the best we can do is make educated guesses about what really took place?
I don't consider the issue of Paul joining the early Christian sect to be at all silly. It's one of the great unanswered questions of New Testament scholarship.
Maybe it got tedious when you started posting.
You mean clear, verifiable evidence for what Paul was really up to? I'm glad you admit that no such evidence is extant.
I've read Paul's epistles and the Acts of the Apostles. It seems that no matter how much of the Bible I read and study, and I've read all of it, Christians keep telling me I either haven't read it or don't understand it if I don't agree with them about what it says.
So it's the great, Bible-reading challenge: Skeptics should read the Bible so that they either believe what it says, or they read it and we tell them they're stupid and ignorant if they don't believe what it says.