I’ve used no footnotes in these blogs, or even quotations from this or that “authority.” Everything is based only on my personal experience and knowledge and analysis. How egotistical is that?! Not so egotistical that I’m not willing to post these words on the Internet, so that I can test and improve my experience and knowledge and analysis. But the simple truth is: I can’t find a foolproof authority to quote.
Consider the options: Experts may be able to provide answers to specific factual questions. But, when it comes to more profound questions about meaning and existence, they can provide only theories. Intense mystical experiences may be a path to a Supreme Being—or an induced hallucination, or the aberration of a mental illness. The Voice of God may be a divine message, or the subconscious talking. Reasoning may be flawed by incomplete information or seduced by a desired outcome. Sages may speak wisdom, or advance hidden agendas. Religious doctrine can reflect deep insights, or the victor’s view of cultural and theological battles. All these sources of authority may provide valid answers, but there is no way to prove which answers are valid.
The most widely recognized sources of reliable authority about profound issues are religious texts. But potential problems with sacred texts are obvious: errors introduced by translation and copying, undue influence from the author’s culture or personality, political influences in the decisions to include or exclude certain texts. But there is a more fundamental problem with all sacred texts: They are expressed in the human language of a specific place and time. Even if the texts record the words of a Supreme Being, human language is inadequate to represent a force beyond human understanding. Metaphors and parables are needed to express the inexpressible—and symbolic speech requires human interpretation. Language is shaped by the need to communicate in a specific culture at a specific time. Even an all-powerful Supreme Being cannot inspire an ancient scribe to comment on the morality of the pill, or the wisdom of having atomic power plants, or the validity of global warming—although sacred texts can be very specific about the moral issues of the time they were written.
My conclusions is that we can turn to authorities for guidance and stimulation, but we cannot use them to remove our responsibility for our own free-will decisions. Ultimately, it is our own authority upon which me must rely and for which we must take responsibility. Even if we try to pass our responsibility on to some higher authority, we are the ones who must decide which higher authority to choose. We cannot present ourselves as authorities possessing absolute correctness. But we can present ourselves as human beings possessing absolute responsibility.
