From what you posted, I'm guessing you do not think of Christianity the same way as I do- which is analogous with a certain formal theological understanding of it. I know that I'm unfamiliar with paganism as a whole so you'll have to go into more detail than that.
Those that I've talked to in the clergy would hasten to agree with the distinction between a faith and the religion, the latter being the framework on which the institution is run: the rituals, the rules, and the various interpretations of doctrine.
I'm not entirely sure what you mean by preprogrammed box of existence but not because I'm unfamiliar with the phrase, so I'll give it a shot. I've often heard religions being criticised because they do slot you into a 'preprogrammed box' so to speak- stemming from a need to espouse and enforce absolutism (a definite perfect and absolutely correct God which entails a single best set of values etc. etc.) I'd agree insofar as the nature of religion tends to be used by people such that they lock themselves in a box. An example would be debating on how the Bible should be interpreted because it is presumed that this is "the word of God". Escaping the box here would entail looking beyond this to acknowledge the broader principles that the various texts in the Bible allude to, as opposed to trying to ascertain prescriptive guidelines on how one should behave.
I suppose then that by "preprogrammed box" you mean "axiology" or a system of values from which we're generally taught. I'm not sure that anybody can escape the box in this manner, but we certainly can be aware of it and monitor the development of our beliefs in light of this.
So then:
I see a commonality in that one of the inherent aims of the Christian faith is similar to that of enlightenment- it's about the method to living a fulfilling life of peace and joy/security. This is, of course, not any groundbreaking suggestion as any movement that relates to the human race should at least engage this. I'm saying that there are ways to treat the Christian faith which would allow this for each person to some extent, (while not creating suffering for others by rejecting their interpretation of faith). Thus, when I say practice, I mean any means by which this is acheived, be it prayer, meditation or observing some religious ritual.
However, I'm more concerned about the bigger picture- in making the thread I'm questioning the validity of the claim "in order to prove my religion is right, I need to be able to prove your religion is wrong." I tend to be more critical of religions because of what I see as the necessary paradoxes that they entail (related to the boxes I tried to discuss above), but right now I'm trying to work around prevalent cultural practices in order to find the most effective guidelines.
