I've never actually stopped to think about this. Sure, he made tents - and I think we tend to stop there. Okay yeah, that's what he did. He killed believers, he made tents, he met Jesus, got saved, stopped killing believers, made tents, got put in prison, wrote a lot of letters, encouraged believers [that list isn't a timeline b.t.w.]. I think about those things, I don't stop and think about his education.

This man went to places of education and proclaimed Christ. - He reasoned in the synagogue with the Jews and the devout persons, and in the market places every day (while in Athens at least). He conversed with Epicurean and Stoic philosophers. (Acts 16)

I'll let an excerpt from Doug Wilson's essay "Intro to Antithesis in Education" take over from here:

"Paul was not unaware of Aristotelian philosophy. He had been well educated under Gamaliel, and demonstrated in his writings a thorough knowledge of Greek philosophy and culture. He knew the language (Acts 21:37), he knew their poets (Acts 17:28), he quoted Diogenes the Cynic (1 Tim 6:10), he knew their current philosophies (Acts 17:17), and he knew the thought of Aristotle. In short, Paul was well-trained in classical culture. But this did not gain him an entry into their circles. The only problem was that he was a classicist who would not play the game of autonomous and humanistic philosophers. He was a classicist who did not fit in well at the philosophy department at the University of Athens (Acts 17:18). They didn't think a lot of him, but then again, he was happy to return fire:
       Where is the wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the disputer of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of this world? For since, the wisdom of God, the world, through wisdom did not know God, it pleased God through the foolishness of the message preached to save those who believe (1 Cor. 1:20-21).  

But it is the next chapter that he deals with Aristotle:
    But the natural man does not recieve the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. (1 Cor. 2:14). 

When modern Christians read the phrase natural man, they tend to think of unregenerate man at his worst-- the drug addict, the philanderer the alcoholic. But Paul is making an entirely different point. He is talking about unregenerate man at his best. The word natural here (psychikos) was a word that was coined by Aristotle, and was used by him to refer to a man at the peak of his form -- man the way he would look after he had completed a rigorous and "classical" education. This is the man, who, according to Paul, does not know God, cannot know God, and does not receive the things of the Spirit. 

So we see in Paul a biblical classicist. He does not run away from classical culture, nor is he defeated or comprimised by it.  Rather, he declares the lordship of Jesus Christ over  it. He does not run away, he does not compromise  He takes every thought captive to Jesus Christ. He uses his vast learning in the cause of the gospel (Acts 26:24)....