That depends. If you wanted to be literal, you could just stick with the New Testament and, more to the point, those virtues that Christ is reputed to have preached therein. Less of the Paul crap, less of the post-crucifixion nonsense, and a lot less of the Old Testament. Christian = of Christ, not of Paul. Given that, if I'm recalling this right, Jewish people have no problem with the Old Testament (it's just when Jesus is involved that things get divisive), the Old Testament isn't really at issue, which wipes out a lot of the inconsistencies at a blow.

I'm aware of Hobbs, yes. Frankly, it sounds like a cop-out to me. I couldn't defer to one person in all things about anything, because if I did, what would be the point of me? You can look at that one on two levels: if you believe in a soul and a divine power, then you might be on earth for a specific purpose or maybe you're just the result of what was set in motion before Deity went off and started doing other things. If you believe it's all just electrochemical impulses and hormones, then opinions are not something over which you have conscious control. Either way, why waste the potential you have by virtue of your ability to think and reason by handing over all responsibility for your opinions to someone who is not you and saying, "Okay, you're my guru; now what?" If you're the sort of person who can lie back in the buckwheat and let someone else make your intellectual, emotional and moral decisions for you, (and I use you in the general 'people who are not me' sense here), then that's your prerogative; I just hope you put your faith in the right person.

...Actually, if you're handing off all decisions to one bod, how on earth do you decide which bod to hand that responsibility?