I agree that's true in theory, but that's not what Christians do in practice. We all want to know that somehow we're in the safe zone, but if we defined our religion too vaguely or if it was too abstract, it might include people who do not uphold he same concepts as us, do not think as we do, or do not have our history or "roots." There would otherwise be no meaningful difference between us and them.
So we define a set of rules to identify ourselves as different to those who do not have our history, do not have our "roots," do not value, love or adore what we value, love or adore. We give ourselves reasons to value the concepts that we hold dear, reasons that ultimately mean that we have and possess something that others do not possess.
We behave as if we
owned it and
had it.
I've come across a multitude of Christian web sites and literature where it seems like the main point is to show how the "Christian" as defined by the web site or literature possesses something that everyone else lacks. It makes it sound like the reason why you have to be Christian is because Christians have something that everyone else is missing.
I personally don't believe that is why people should belong to a "church." It's the other way round!!! A person is Christian because
he is "lacking." He goes to church for fulfillment of his personal needs. Everyone else, those outside the church have figured it out. Christians are not the ones who "have it." No, they are the ones who "don't have it and need it." The real "Christian" is a person who is missing something that everybody else has already got. We're people with special needs, not providers of needs.
Church is a Sanctuary, a refuge, a safe haven, a place for reflection, reformation and regeneration when life goes sour. We go to churches because we were in hell and we needed a Sanctuary.