Surely it pivots merely on not being logically fallacious with appeals to authority? If you accept the authority you will believe what they say. If you don't accept it then they you won't believe it or accept it on their word alone. Since all of religion seems to require appeal to such authorities for its validation, it is (as others have mentioned elsewhere) a cycle of needing to believe to be able to believe. So how does one validate the truth or validity of one view over another without recourse to such authority?