Christianity after Nietzsche

The only truly viable form of Christianity after Nietzsche, and the one that has been available and proper all along though never widely acknowledged (and yet perhaps very widely practiced), it seems to me, is one that has sufficient respect for the church, for tradition, and for the Bible to consult them continuously but which is brave enough always to reject them as ultimate authorities on any issue. This, it seems to me is the Christianity that is closest to that of the New Testament Jesus, though it was soon after his death derailed--indeed never really rested on the tracks even when he was walking among us illustrating and teaching it. And after Constantine, of course, all hell broke loose. 

Christianity is a belief--I don't want to say "a system of belief"--and a practice. And they cannot be separated. The old "faith v. works" debate is nonsense. "Faith" and "works" are not two things. They are one thing with two names. 

Can you be a "good person" and not believe? Can you "believe" and not be a good person? 

There are no good people; there are no evil people. There are only good and evil actions. There are actions motivated by love and there are actions motivated without the consideration of love. 

And what is this "belief" we are supposed to have that "saves us"? Different self-proclaimed authorities give it different names or catechisms. Consult them all, if you like, then set them aside. The belief that leads you to act out of love, that is the one you need.