TonusOH...I agree with your logic that many of these items "could ' have happened. But none of them are established facts as was claimed. Many 'historical Jesus' writers use a similar logic as you have, by eliminating the impossible, they imagine some historical core. That approach however fails to appreciate the creativity of the author of Mark, the role of OT midrash and the boastful nature of Paul.
"Paul" is claimed to have been a highly recognized Pharisee but at the same time claimed to have been sent on a mission by the Sadducean High Priest. Highly unlikely. Many of the doctrinal issues that inspired contempt for Christians were equally divisive among those groups. Also Roman law forbid local authorities conducting executions without their endorsement. Making the Acts stoning story improbable and illegal. Also Acts has Paul (Saul) being a resident of Jerusalem participating in the stoning by the Sanhedrin. Either we have Paul's backstory being fabricated post-Paul or he was exaggerating to impress his audience. Given the contradicting versions in Acts and the Paulines, we have to recognize that either is possible, and maybe a mix of the two.