Presbyterianism's Rejection of the Sufficiency of Scripture

https://reformedforum.org/podcasts/ctc848/

I literally laughed out loud when I reached the 47:00 minute mark of this podcast - an exercise in the torture that is Presbyterian polity. We have committees to exercise oversight of committees.

So what's the big deal? There isn't one apart from the fact that this faction continues to insist that their model is not just the best polity vis-à-vis Scripture, but the only system Scripture permits. This 'Divine Right' claim is absurd and becomes worthy of derision (and frankly scorn) when examined in light of the New Testament. They completely lose their way as such discussions (in the podcast) all too painfully illustrate.

As I continue to argue, this polity actually rests on a claim of Scriptural Insufficiency. In other words, what they're saying is that Scripture does not provide a polity but simply a few broad strokes and principles - maybe about 10% of the necessary model. The other 90% is left to the philosophical theologians, denominational bureaucrats and other apparatchiks and politicians to flesh out. It's a man-made system. Whether it works or not (I argue it doesn't), is immaterial to the fundamental debate regarding authority. Episcopacy works too, but it's not Biblical.

In some respects as with all questions regarding the nature of theology, this issue also harks back to prolegomena. What is theology and how is it to be pursued? And ecclesiology falls under this question. There is a division at this point and I realized long ago that what holds together the Reformed Confessionalist movement is not the binding authority of Scripture, nor the Holy Spirit, but a rigid adherence to a locked-in tradition, a set of symbols that when examined are demonstrably un-Scriptural at many key points. The system is not the worst out there to be sure, but it's own claims regarding orthodoxy and Biblical fidelity must be rejected. Perhaps the most glaring example of its shortcomings are in the realm of polity - an area of doctrine in which it's diversion from Scripture is palpable.

The simple polity of the New Testament is sufficient but it's not going to build institutions and while Church history reveals why denominations and other hierarchies evolved, a determined return to New Testament norms and authority demand their disintegration as they are condemned and are de facto schismatic. At the end of the day that's what these discussions are all about, building walls and systems of protection for their schismatic endeavours - bureaucracies and institutions that don't help the Church, but hinder it, divide it, and yet provide paychecks, pensions, and benefits for the clerics within the system.