Don't think of it as an appeal to authority, think of it as a large number of credible eyewitness wrote down what they witnessed over a long term association with Jesus. Those accounts have been valued and preserved for your consideration.
The Truth of Christianity is in those accounts in their original languages. The existence of many denominations merely means humans disagree on how to view them. Some are further off than others. I never object to any viewpoint that can be explained with an honest attempt to understand the original texts.
The Council of Nicea called together hundreds of Christian leaders from around the Mediterranean to compare notes about what they had been teaching for several generations. How else do you recommend sorting out what properly traces back to the apostles vs. what got inserted falsely after the fact? This process actually continued for 500 years before universal agreement was achieved. The criterion applied was: "Show us proof that this document is traceable back to an original apostle or one of his assistants." That's not censorship, that's due diligence.
Pointing out things like the burning of the library of Alexandria happened are irrelevant. Lots of bad things happened in history. This says nothing about the truth of any specific instance.
It is true that the Roman church suppressed availability of the Scriptures for 1000 years until the printing press and the Protestant Reformation went back to the original Bible as authoritative. There are 5600 manuscripts dating back to the first few generations and these all agree. So claims of corruption and bad behavior by others after that time are irrelevant. We know with a high degree of certainty what the original eyewitnesses wrote.
They have not been preserved though. The history is there showing they are edited, and even censored by men. It does not matter HOW MANY people you have that is still an APPEAL TO AUTHORITY. Does quantity of people dictate whether gravity is true or not? Any appeal to authority regardless of the source is a logical fallacy.
And have you gone back further? Have you for example studied the Hindu Krishna which predates Christianity? Have you studied the Egyptians and the life story of Horus?
If not... give it a look. I think you'll be surprised.
And PLEASE don't take my word for it. Look for yourself. That is all I have done. I have a lot of bibles, and not one of them is exactly the same. :) In this instance I am referring to Christian based bibles.
But yes everything you stated in the beginning still qualifies as an appeal to authority. "credible eyewitnesses". A common example of an appeal to authority is "I am a doctor, you can trust me."
You should never believe something simply because someone else tells you that you should. You can CHOOSE to believe them, but it should not because they told you to, or because they have been given some label like LEADER, WISEMAN, PRIEST, GENIUS, SCIENTIST, or CREDIBLE. :)
Actually, no. The oldest manuscripts have not been edited.
Here's the sequence I find sufficient for me:
Anyhow, that's what works for me. You may have a different process.
In this thread, all I'm saying is that God is NOT going to give you perfect proof for good and sufficient reasons. You'll just have to get over that if you want the shot of life-giving antibiotics He is offering you. Do you apply your same skepticism when your doctor says you need a shot? Will you refuse that shot because taking it would be an appeal to authority? Do you require the AMA to show up a brief you on all the evidence that the shot is necessary, safe and effective? If not, why not?
An Appeal to Authority does not mean you should not listen. It simply is NOT logical proof of anything. You cannot say because SO AND SO said this it must be true.
What someone says does not prove anything other than they said words and that they MAY believe what they said. People lie, so it can't even be proven that they meant it.
So an APPEAL TO AUTHORITY by no means is telling you the person is wrong. It simply means that because they said it does not make it TRUE.
You still have to use some common sense, quickly analyze probabilities (instinctively) based upon the knowledge you have an make a decision.
There is older scripture than that by the way. How far back have you gone?
EDIT: And I did up vote you. This is not intended as an attack of any kind. I appreciate you taking the time to respond. I've actually had people tell me those exact things in verbal discussions with priests. Yes, I am friends with priests. Lutheran, Presbyterrian, Catholic. I was Director of IT at a Hospice and I'd sit and chat with those three priests daily at lunch. They were some of my closest friends there.
That's good to hear.
My point has been I'm not trying to prove anything.
In fact, God does not intend to offer proof to anyone except a few chosen witnesses.
Because he specifically wants to leave room for people to walk away.
If he wanted there to be proof he would move planets around to different orbits every day or give the Chicago Cubs a World Series or something else that violates the laws of physics like that.