Saul/Paul was *not* a Jewish rabbi. His teaching was not of Judaism. He was a Hellenist.
Gamaliel was Paul’s teacher (Acts 22:3). Gamaliel was not a Hellenist.
Saul/Paul was *not* a Jewish rabbi. His teaching was not of Judaism. He was a Hellenist.
Paul’s own words.
Acts 23:
6 But when Paul perceived that the one part were Sadducees, and the other Pharisees, he cried out in the council, Men [and] brethren, I am a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee: of the hope and resurrection of the dead I am called in question.
Philippians Chapter 3
3 For we are the circumcision, which worship God in the spirit, and rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh.
4 Though I might also have confidence in the flesh. If any other man thinketh that he hath whereof he might trust in the flesh, I more:
5 Circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, [of] the tribe of Benjamin, an Hebrew of the Hebrews; as touching the law, a Pharisee;
6 Concerning zeal, persecuting the church; touching the righteousness which is in the law, blameless.
Marie, Vlad touched on this in his reply to you. However, I don't know where you come up with the above assertion. There is no evidence to support the above claim. We do have evidence of Paul being a Hebrew among Hebrews:
Philippians 3:(NASB)
2 Beware of the dogs, beware of the evil workers, beware of the false circumcision; 3 for we are the true circumcision, who worship in the Spirit of God and glory in Christ Jesus and put no confidence in the flesh, 4 although I myself might have confidence even in the flesh. If anyone else has a mind to put confidence in the flesh, I far more: 5 circumcised the eighth day, of the nation of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of Hebrews; as to the Law, a Pharisee; 6 as to zeal, a persecutor of the church; as to the righteousness which is in the Law, found blameless.
That is unless you view the above testimony as being false. I do not.