What exactly is that selection?

And did you make the effort to examine Christianity?

You ask yourself how likely it is that you’ll find the truth there.
It didn’t seem to me worth a more in-depth examination (I know the basic principles).

If the whole idea of examining and rationalizing our beliefs is only to give us comfort in what we already tend to believe, but we aren’t really basing our beliefs on rational examination at all (only on rough intuition), then what’s the whole point of it? It basically won’t say anything objective about the world and so on, beyond justifying the position one is already inclined toward.

Very true.

So it comes out that faith / belief (and inquiry), in its essence, is not a factual claim about the world, but rather an excuse for why I’m not crazy to think a certain way?!
But what if someone (a psychologist/sociologist) can come up with better explanations for why we tend to have certain intuitions—what value does that intuition still carry, other than being my own invention with no reason to abandon it?
Is that what you call rational?

So it comes out? How does it come out? That follows from what you wrote, not from what I wrote.
You wrote that if I search only in order to justify my a priori belief, then that isn’t an honest search and it doesn’t have much value. As I wrote, that is completely true. But what does that have to do with what I wrote? I didn’t write that the search is meant to justify my beliefs, but that I steer the search according to my common sense and choose what to focus on (after all, it’s impossible to examine all the possibilities all the way through). That’s how we act in every area of life, and so too in matters of faith / belief. What does that have to do with what you wrote?