this tells me you still believe you are reading literal history, and imo hidden from the wise prolly doesnt work like that? The surface story is imo rarely--sometimes prolly, but--the real story, in Scripture. Or say strictly milk anyway. Now i guess i should rather never eat meat again rather than offend etcetc, but i justify that to irl as i would rather be offended here if at all possible myself, as thats how i know i'm prolly wrong but my point is they did not have to remember anything, most likely.
i know thats maybe a big bite to take, but for an example there was then extant a large camp of Jews in Cyrene, and the Simon of Cyrene Incident might be perceived as the Jews there giving their blessing to the NT, broadly speaking, the literal verbal exchange actually pointing to this in an interesting "naive" way that really almost cant be explained in words, how one is supposed to take it. Picture understanding "stay here for the present" one way v the other, only this one has another dimension, a pointer like thing in it. Man, i forget how i saw it, there was a study, and someone suggested trying diff roles...oh ya, imagine Simon saying his lines as a four year old, what a four year old would mean by them. Might not be your thing right now, but ya. There isnt an accidental word in Scripture imo, all the apparent contradictions are installed on purpose i think