Your biblical teaching is based on affirmation and succession of men too. It's based on man's private interpretation of the Bible which the bible specifically warns against.
The point is we do not believe that just claiming Jesus as Savior anyway one feels about it. All others do. That places all others in the same camp as LDS and JW. That's not a "church."
“Such belies a fundamental difference in ecclesiology. You believe the Body of Christ is institutionally defined by the affirmation of a succession of men, whereas we believe the Body of Christ is institutionally defined by the affirmation of Biblical teaching.”
F, it was just such “company men” who defined what you read as scripture. Christian Scripture, unlike the Koran, was not dictated by God and God did not dictate the canon. The Bible is a product of, was defined by, The Church, F, not the other way around. Now this theology of course cannot be acceptable to Protestants because it necessarily means that the one of the foundations of Protestantism, the “invisible church” cannot possibly exist. It doesn’t do much for the 16th century notion of sola scriptura either.