Yes I see the difference but is it a real or significant difference or is it just one of countless translation problems in the Bible?
It still means basically the same thing doesn't? I imagine that TO is nearer the intention of the writer. Peter taught the Jews, Paul taught the gentiles.
And yes there is a different approach between Paul and all the other disciples and even with the words attributed to Jesus Himself. Paul likely had his epiphany 5 / 6 / 7 years after Jesus was dead so he was going to have a less hands-on insight and this was when Christianity was beginning to establish strategies for taking the Teachings of Christ to the gentiles. So Paul had a teaching strategy especially conceived for gentiles. So the differences between Peter and Paul were more about strategies than theological conflict.
Just because we see some seemingly conflicting scripture between Paul and Jesus we should not assume that the Bible contains every scrap of understanding that these men had or all the teachings they performed.
We are getting a tiny flake of their lives and some of the words they possibly spoke in relation to the Christ. Paul obviously said so much more than was ever recorded. My understanding is that he taught on behalf of Jesus for some 20 years.
I don't know that we have any real and conclusive evidence of a theological difference of opinion here. I'm sure if Paul was speaking to the converted he would acknowledge that faith can only ever be demonstrated by deeds, after all his life was one of endless deeds that eventually led to his martyrdom. Surely his actions speak louder than words?
