"Can't I have just a little bit of peril?" ;)

In the absence of a document where Jesus spells it out, you choose to believe it was a late idea, and therefore an extraneous one. I will point out that Luke records some divine corroboration for Paul's ministry to the Gentiles: in Acts 9, the Lord told Ananias that Paul was to bear His Name to them. But more importantly, Peter (and the others who had been given direct authority over interpretation of the Covenant) accepted Paul's arguments (cf Acts 10). Peter attests in that passage to the "gift of the Holy Spirit" (considered a sign of the covenant) being "poured out" on the Gentiles. Not to mention Peter's own vision, which he uses as his argument in Acts 11, and which his hearers accept as authoritative. Although there continued to be a vocal minority who wished for all Christians to be circumcised, the council of Jerusalem in Acts 15 shows a leadership "having become of one mind" on the matter.

All of which is to say, if you accept the visions and the apostles' consensus interpretation of prophecy as valid testimony, then there isn't much wiggle room. If you do not accept them, then you must *guess* what "really happened", since there is no accurate record. Again, I'm going to go with those who were actually there, witnesses to both Jesus in life and the events which transpired following his death--they had a much more complete picture of Jesus' position than you or I can have 2000 years later.