Andu wrote:I'm also wonder why people hold one religious scripture as a higher authority than another.
What makes them an authority, other than themself just stating so?
Well, I can't speak for anything other than Judaism, but the usual argument in brief goes like this -- the claim that the revelation to millions of people at Mt. Sinai (600,000 men between the ages of 20-60+the uncounted women and children) happened must be true, simply because there's no point in time when you could simply state that such a thing happened long ago and that you must follow 613 laws and that you know this because your (grand)father passed it along to you and his to him and so on up until the event itself. In order for there to have been a conspiracy to get these laws followed by and passed down among the entire Jewish people with a made up story to go along with it, it would have to have involved the ENTIRE Jewish people (already known stereotypically in the Bible as a "stiff-necked" bunch who would use any excuse not to obey God), else you'd have whistleblowers saying, "Hey, they lied, that never happened. The king just made that up twenty years ago". This is quite different then the claim that God or an angel spoke to a single human being (an event witnessed by none or a few) telling them stuff X,Y, and Z. (One can certainly argue the case that the event was not what it appeared to be, that it was aliens, or Moses was some kind of mass hypnotist or creator of then-unknown technology to create the special effect necessary, or whatever, but it's much harder to claim that no such event took place).
Hence, to the extent that the five books of the Torah says, "this is it, this is the final word, and I'm not changing it and don't believe anything anybody coming after says about changing it", the Torah has to have the veto authority over anything subsequent.
And again, this doesn't necessarily preclude the idea that God didn't give different laws to people other than the Jews, but that's why the Torah is authoritative for us.