Then you were not reading the HD who contended that Peter was preaching salvation by a gospel which demanded works to be forgiven/saved, and never preached that Christ died for our sins as in the gospel of the grace of God, but preached "the gospel of the kingdom" until after Paul enlightened him.
And as Paul says in Gal. 1:6-9 that there is no other valid gospel, and those who preach any other one are accused, thus Peter would be if he ever preached what he did in Acts after Paul supposedly enlightened him.
See my response to which here .
I don't have time to address your entire tome but will say that you seem to missing the point of what smvoice is pointing out. I'll use one example. In your response you reference Acts 13 in an attempt to make a point that Paul also presented the death of Christ as bad news. HE DID NOT. He simply reiterated what had happened then made this comment. “We tell you the good news: What God promised our ancestors 33he has fulfilled for us, their children, by raising up Jesus. As it is written in the second Psalm:. He then went on to say “Therefore, my friends, I want you to know that through Jesus the forgiveness of sins is proclaimed to you. 39Through him everyone who believes is set free from every sin, a justification you were not able to obtain under the law of Moses..
And it's interesting that you referenced Acts 13 because we have in that chapter an example of what Peter was preaching at Pentecost.
Acts 13:24 Before the coming of Jesus, John preached repentance and baptism to all the people of Israel.
Peter was preaching essentially the same message as John the Baptist was.
As I said in an earlier post to you. I think you are not taking into consideration the time-line of Peter's message. He clearly changed after Paul was introduced and surely did after the incident with Cornelius.
It seems to me you are being needlessly harsh while missing some points yourself.