Just beginning to read Stephen Batchelor turned me on in a big way:
With the first 3 pages of Buddhism Without Belief there came what seemed to me a significant gestalt- call it a vision:
Belief! Yes, that's what's wrong with Christianity, conventional Christianity, that is.
The gospels have Jesus constantly exhorting us to believe. But believe what? I infer that he meant believe in the power of love that he brought us from God.
But-- for the first 3 centuries we got layers and layers of theological overlay which was then sealed as orthodoxy by Constantine. He insisted that everyone believe the same thing. Possibly a good political policy, but definitely not good theology. It turned free followers of Jesus into lemmings.
For many years it has been painfully obvious that at this point we got a fallen church, a church tuned to worldly power, and nothing since has happened to 'raise' it. Nothing but the heretics like gnostics, bogomils... and quakers!
These groups stood for individuality-- everyone getting his own guidance from God. However even here strong forces pushed people toward conformity. Maybe they don't use quaker dress anymore, but they have a jargon! and a few other things; it sets them apart from other tribes.
There is one belief that seems to me essential- belief in life as Jesus pictured it for us. Not an intellectual proposition but something to test, and see what happens. That's my "enobling truth". That's the path, the way.
On page 5 Batchelor points out how Buddha's enobling truths were converted into [theological] propositions. From this I infer that the course of Buddhism was, then remarkably similar to Christianity as I've described it. How refreshing to be delivered from the need to open big books to learn "something about Buddhism".