If you are going to use Galatians to formulate the timeline, then why not also note that in Galatians Paul informs us that he was not taught the gospel by human agency. How does that square with the claim that Paul received the gospel as a fundamental of the faith from someone like Ananias?

Note Galatians chapter 1.

11 I want you to know, brothers, that the gospel I preached is not something that man made up. 12 I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it; rather, I received it by revelation from Jesus Christ.

Yet in I Cor Paul says "Let me explain something I received by human agency" and he goes on to describe the gospel, the very thing he says he was not taught via human agency in Galatians 1.

Those committed to inerrancy will resolve this by saying that Paul isn't saying he got the gospel in I Cor 15. He's saying he got the cool way of formulating the gospel. OK. But notice that Craig does not see it this way in his initial reading. The text really doesn't imply this as we read it. Craig comes away from this text thinking that Paul was taught the fundamentals of the faith by human agency, apparently forgetting about Galatians 1. With no commitment to inerrancy, why not just conclude that these texts contradict one another?