The basic critique I have on Christianity is mainly based on the idea that Paul changed the basic message. From the very beginning of my looking at the New Testament I did not see much different than the basic message of learning and keeping Torah except with and emphasis on kindness.  The ideas of belief did not seem any different that what the sages of the Talmud say about the importance of belief in the wise. I had before that learned a small amount of the writings of Isaac Luria and Reb Nachman and that helped to see that the statements of Jesus  could all be understood and were probably meant in the usual mystic way that most Jewish tzadikim have been expressing themselves  for long time.

So on one hand I think it is great that Christians have faith in a true tzadik. On the other hand I think they have gotten the whole thing mixed up with lots of incoherent ideas. So which is more important? To believe in a true tzadik even if you do not understand what he said and even make great errors about what he meant; or not to believe in the tzadik at all, and to attribute bad motives to him? It seems to me belief in a true tzadik outweighs the negative aspects of misinterpreting what he said.

This basic approach was based on my own reading and later I saw the writings of the direct disciple of Peter confirmed this impression. See the Clementine Homilies and Recognitions.