Well whatever your source authority in life may be - you've entrusted yourself to it based upon faith either way. I myself identify as a Christian, and no other moniker is really necessary. If you take your faith seriously why should you attach additional labels - as if your faith is needing your intervention. When you depend solely on your own efforts to be "right" where can faith abide?
Imagine playing a basketball game, and someone's like "I can win the game so gimme the ball!" Mister I-can-do-it-all-myself doesn't believe (has zero faith) in his teammates' ability to pull through.
There is no way for you to depend upon such a significant string of decisions of your life 'by yourself.' Verifiable faith is slippery - because of how misconstrued our hopes can be. What do we hope for? Some would say eternal life in a place called heaven where only good people (ironically insinuating they know all what's good, and what's bad), and others would suggest we hope for nothing, but still some others would imagine differently.
To paraphrase some replies to this thread: "Well the Bible has some pretty wacky stuff that couldn't possibly have happened . . ." Well the Bible does introduce an omnipotent, omnipresent, (one more o word I forgot), and sovereign God that is not bound by what He created (insert innumerable natural laws that were thrown aside in the Bible). It makes sense to me that the Creator could not possibly be bound by His creation since the supernatural is . . . not natural (e.g. supernatural > natural). As wild as the accounts in the Bible are - it consistently revolves around one Character, which is the Creator.
"Well some behavior should be obvious . . . people are smart enough to think for themselves . . ." You'd be surprised, and once you observe behavior our innate ability to be stupid, or ignorant (take your pick) will reveal itself. What most know is what others have divulged to us in whatever manners they please (I'm not willing to pedestal myself as an intellectual-I-know-it-all, or wise-willy-would), and faith is something each individual possesses in their own capacity. Some require great leaps of verification, and others do not, however, both of those are subject to change. Faith and religion are often misunderstood (faith is the assurance of what we hope for and the certainty of what we do not see), because of the extensively different tangibles or characteristics involved in each one's understanding of faith and what constitutes truth that validates their faith, because if your faith is correct . . . it will be truth right?
I believe in absolute truth. I do not believe I alone have the capacity to determine what is absolutely right or wrong (I abhor sanctimonious drivel), but I adhere with faith to my source authority with beliefs that I can take Him at His Word. As such I believe there is only one source authority, and have no interest in deceiving others - reassuring them that they're just fine (e.g. there's a party, but I won't tell you that you could miss it) whilst knowing I myself were not, and could not possibly be if left to my own devices. I believe that evangelism is necessary, but is difficult.

I believe in revelation. Whoever is among us has surely revealed His presence in one way or another - seeing the way the world works, and what we make of it, which is not ambiguous if absolute truth exists. Arguing accomplishes nothing, because it is up to the individual person to decide. I could provide the most apologetic Christian message to an unbeliever, but they still can resist. An evolutionist could provide a large amount of their own verifiable evidence, and a Christian won't be moved. Humans don't have the power to compel others to their own singular will (manipulation is not synonymous with compelling), but the God Christians believe in also won't force anyone to believe in him (free will). Discussion is important, and unfortunately civil discourse is not the way it should be nowadays. Funny as my English Professor discussed the pathway to the original 13 colonies rebelling, and how difficult initially the discourse was.
The whole topic of religion is interesting, and for the better part is well received. What we differ on doesn't make us any better than anyone else, and as a Christian a cardinal understanding is that sin is not exclusive to sinners (e.g. Romans chapter 3). Sin being a wedge between the Creator and His creation. I'm not a denominational Christian, but simply a Christian. I wasn't born a Christian (I don't believe that happens), but I was raised in a Baptist Church (I believe Baptism is a ceremony, and nothing more). I don't believe I'm saved through works (Ephesians 2:8-9), but rather by accepting a free gift (I couldn't earn it) that I'm free to receive or reject (I believe everyone must make a decision, which determines their eternal destiny).
I'm feeling rather moved by the thread itself, and I'm willing to discuss here or via private messages about my faith. I cannot guarantee a speedy, correct, or satisfying response, but will try my best. Don't laugh at me

I haven't gotten out of my cocoon yet.

EDIT: About rules . . . I find it annoying and now even more difficult to look at my faith as a bunch of rules. Being a Christian by definition in our Basic Instructions Before Leaving Earth is not begrudgingly stepping around no-no areas, but rather a relationship you take more seriously than anything else. My parents are married, and have 5 children including myself. My parents don't look at the Bible and go "Whelp honey, I crossed this off the list." Neither do I "Well God you ought to be pleased now, because I suffered and denied myself to exalt you." Deeds do not translate to faith, and as a Christian your faith produces deeds - not the other way around. Sure faith can be made evident by deeds, but righteousness, which by faith we hope and know we can attain through God. In other words: works =/= Salvation, and faith =/= Salvation, Salvation = Faith+Works, because faith without works is dead.