But the contention of HDs (hyperdispensationalists), such as reject water baptism, do have Peter preaching another gospel before being enlightened by Paul, which the gospel "we preach" then refers to. And thus i said that Paul would be accursed if he ever again preached the gospel of in Acts 2, and that of Acts 10, as the HD here also attacked that for likewise not explicitly saying Christ died for our sins.
The preaching of the Kingdom to come for Jews was indeed "good news" as it was an assurance that God would indeed keep His word to them.
But which preaching meant that the Messiah provided the needed atonement for sins, and that faith in Him obtained forgiveness and the Spirit, and which latter-day (which era the coming of Christ signified) promise was an extended one, that "it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh ..." "that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved ," (Acts 2:21), offered "to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call." (Acts 2:39)
Likewise the message of Paul in Acts 13 is extended as, "whosoever among you feareth God , to you is the word of this salvation sent." (Acts 13:26)
Therefore, while not yet realizing that the New Covenant, which was distinctly "Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers..." meant that obedience to the entire Law was not required, and thus the burden of the entire law and the danger of ritual uncleanness which hindered evangelism of the Gentiles (which Jews did engage in) was no longer a problem, yet both Peter and Paul essentially preached the same gospel from the start.
Which message was not that of the Judaizers which Paul wish would be cut off (or castrated) in Gal 5:12, that held that obedience to the entire law justified souls, but was basically that of the coming of the Messiah, who was rejected and unjustly slain by wicked men (thus requiring the hearers to make the opposite choice), whom God raised up, and thus the forgiveness of sins was thus provided thru repentant faith in Him. A faith which effected obedience, but which did not merit sinners justification before God.
Instead, implicit in promising forgiveness and regeneration by faith in Christ is that one is accepted by God on His account and expense," thus "whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved."
And contrary to the assertion of two essentially different gospels, this is what Paul preached from the beginning, that his heavenly vision from the Lord was that the Gentiles "may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith that is in Me," (Acts 26:18) Which is what he told the Jews and Gentiles, thus he "shewed first unto them of Damascus, and at Jerusalem, and throughout all the coasts of Judæa, and then to the Gentiles, that they should repent and turn to God, and do works meet for repentance." (Acts 26:19-20)
Having therefore obtained help of God, I continue unto this day, witnessing both to small and great, saying none other things than those which the prophets and Moses did say should come: That Christ should suffer, and that he should be the first that should rise from the dead, and should shew light unto the people, and to the Gentiles. (Acts 26:22-23)
Adaptations can be made and supplementary material given in consideration of the hearers, as seen in Acts (and also in the duplicate accounts material in the gospels), and most souls need to be also be made to realize how desperately the need forgiveness, and if need by, how sacrifice is needed for forgiveness (and Jews would recognize the death of the Holy and Just One and corespondent to the OT atonement). Yet the gospel message promises forgiveness by repentant faith in the sinless crucified and risen Messiah. Which is a implicit recognition of His Divinity.
That both the Hebrew preachers and hearers (which included non-Jews) expected the Lord to imminently set up His kingdom (which still meant children needed to be saved), yet this did not exclude Gentiles from being saved and part of that kingdom. We now see that the realization of the physical kingdom is simply delayed, but Gentiles are saved today by believing the basic message of Acts 2, though it is tailored to them as it was in Acts 10.
The explicit explanatory theological statements made by Paul and Peter in letters to Christians, which HDs use to assert that there are two gospels, are never clearly made by them in actually preaching the gospel in Acts. And that the ones by Peter in his letters, (1Pt. 1:18,19; 3:18) were due to enlightenment by Paul, and which HDs exclude as being understood by Peter and implicitly conveyed in Acts, lacks warrant.
And as explained before, both Peter and Paul promise salvation to those who believe with repentant faith and profess the Lord Jesus who died and rose again, (Acts 2:38; 10:43; 13:39; Rm. 10:9-13) and there is no essential difference btwn moving the neurons in one's brain in believing, and the tongue in confessing, and the legs in doing the same in baptism. All are volitional responses enabled and motivated by God in His grace, apart from which man could not and would not believe, yet these do not merit justification.
While God also rewards faith in recognition of its effects, (Heb. 10:35) which character and works "justify" one as being a believer (Heb. 6:9) and fit to be rewarded, (Rv. 3:4) yet both the ability and motivation is of God, and the only thing man really deserves on his own accord is damnation. To God be the glory.
They are NOT different gospels as far as salvation is concerned. I am at a loss as to why people don't understand that. No one has said salvation comes by any other means then faith in the atoning sacrifice of Christ. Peter even still just prior to the meeting at the house of Cornelius was focused on the Jews and had to be told in vision and revelation.
While God also rewards faith in recognition of its effects, (Heb. 10:35) which character and works "justify" one as being a believer (Heb. 6:9) and fit to be rewarded, (Rv. 3:4) yet both the ability and motivation is of God, and the only thing man really deserves on his own accord is damnation. To God be the glory.
By God's Grace well stated and concluded.