Because I believe Christianity to be in line with the way we were created.
Why?!
Every testable claim christianity has made about our creation has been debunked, often repeatedly after several revisions.
There wasn't and Adam and Eve, look up "mitochondrial Eve" for the evidence. There is one woman we are all descended from, but many men.
Any age christains put forward for the Earth with only theology or revelation has been laughably wrong. Look up "how do scientists know the age of the earth" there are literally dozens of techniques and they all agree with eachother and disagree christainity.
Christians came up with "spontaneous generation" and "intelligent design" one as an earnest attempt to explain life and the other as a psuedopolitical movement. Both laughably wrong, but I can kind of get the perspective leading to spontaneous generation if one doesn't understand maggots and flies are the same creature or about migratory birds.
God and the bible entirely failed to predict DNA, evolution, radiometric dating, species outside the middle east and Europe, the source of seasons, the precession of Earth, any Paleolithic animal, radiation, selective breeding, fusion in stars, stellar generations and their importance to heavy metal creation, and I could go on for hours on just things god could predict and reveal that iron age farmers didn't know about.
Yet somehow the knowledge of the religious is always limited to the knowledge of their day, and rarely even the best knowledge.
we are not born as a blank slate... But with isntincts to live, grow, reproduce and acheive greatness
Where does christianity provide special enlightenment on this? I don't see how Christianity provides any enlightenment that Confucianism, taoism, Hinduism, Islam, etc... Doesn't also provide. Actually, I started with Confucianism because it has an opinions on this that are closer to true than Christianity. Confucianism is still pretty fucked up and stupid though, it just has strong opinions on paternity and maternity that are closer to reality but still pretty far off the mark.
I urge you to read Richard Dawkins The Selfish Gene:
$5 dollar paperback - https://www.amazon.com/Richard-Dawkins-Selfish-Paperback-Anniv/dp/B01FOD608I
Free audiobook with new audible sign up: https://www.amazon.com/Unknown-The-Selfish-Gene/dp/B004U8NB2M
Hardcover: https://www.amazon.com/Extended-Selfish-Gene-Richard-Dawkins/dp/0198788789
It's written by a pretty smart biologist. It isn't new theories being put forth. Rather the culmination of what many biologists have put in peer reviewed papers but made more digestible for non-scientists. Dawkins also has a children's book and several other books relating to biology and theology.
I specifically call out the selfish Gene because it explains in terms a non-scientist can understand how things like instinct and altruism can evolve. It even lays down a little bit of math for when we can predict when altruism will evolve versus when selfishness will evolve. If you want to go more in-depth it isn't hard to get original papers with the real math, or to find YouTube videos where people have built software simulations that go through the reproduction, life and death, and repetition the real evolution operates through show that the math holds up. If you want these I will provide some for you, but a book like this is likely to satisfy curiosity and give you the terms you need to search for yourself.
I am having trouble seeing how anyone who goes out and actively seeks knowledge sticks with any religion. At present it seems to me that any religion eventually will be demonstrated as wrong when an expert follows up any academic long enough.
Too much history shows that judiasm was once a cult for a war god in a pantheon of many gods whose followers where genocided out of existence, and that became the basis for christianity.
Too much biology and that the bible claims bats are birds really starts to irk you. Biology also fucks with concepts about souls and the elevation of man above animals.
Hell, too much math will get you to foundations of logic and that gets some problems the very notion of proof and falsifiability.
Astronomy runs straight into the predictions of the iron age and needs to blast through firmament, earth-centrism, heliocentrism, and a ton of other practical problems just to grock what the naked eye can see. As soon as telescopes show up we have to start asking why 99.999999% (I am dreadfully low on this percentage) of the matter of the universe isn't mentioned. The bible doesn't even mention that the sun is 99% of the mass in our solar system, and that would have been a neat little prediction that would add credibility to a Divine revealer.
Even computer science and simulations of intelligence show huge incompatibility will silly religious notions like souls.
This is just my pwrsonal knowledge, a person expert in archaeological endeavors has problems with some of the historical claims in holy texts. I wonder what early rocket scientists thought when flying up into the heavens and not hitting a firmament. I wonder what religious electrical think about god's silence on their whole career. I am curious how religious petrochemical explorers reconcile the age of earth with Fossil fuels...
Religion and reality are such different things that one must be willfully ignorant in this age of information to claim they line up.
So now I must ask why do you think this last snippet is of your comment is true?
I believe that Christianity is most in line with that. Often it isn't preached that way... But I do think it is.
Why do you believe? Is it just a feeling? Or is there some underlying reason? Is it possible that like most people you believe a religion purely because of the location of your birth?