I think that religious faith is a particular segment of philosophy, and an aberrant one at that. Personally, I don't think that Jesus' philosophy need necessarily be tied to religion. I know that there's that whole son-of-God thing, but, it seems to me that that's more an element of Paulism than Christianity. Of course, Paulism coopted Christianity in the first century AD, and the first no longer really exists (and I think that Paul is largely responsible for what's been wrong with Christianity since the beginning), but that's another argument.

There are many secular philosophies, and there are many religious philosophies. But neither set requires adherence in order to study it. I can know about Existentialism and Deism and Taoism and Confucianism and Objectivism and Nihilism and Secular Humanism and Unitarianism and Neo-Conservatism and Naziism and Satanism without having to believe in any of it, just as I can know about Christianity and reject it just as much as I reject the others. The study of something does not mean the belief in something, but when you start talking about the personal viewpoints of a person in a position of leadership, you start promoting those viewpoints.