Amen. Teaching elders are given their gift of instruction by God. Pastors like Calvin, Luther, Spurgeon, Whitefield, Van Til, Warfield, Bahnsen, Hodge, Owen, Edwards, all were graced with the ability to understand Scripture and preach the Gospel effectively.
But the true teacher of the word of God is not a man, but the Holy Spirit.
Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual." -- 1 Corinthians 2:12-13"Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God.
And thus the excellent teacher, John Calvin, can confidently state:
"Scripture is the school of the Holy Spirit, in which, as nothing is omitted that is both necessary and useful to know, so nothing is taught but what is expedient to know.” -– John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion
I agree that allowing the Scriptures to illuminate themselves is possible on most issues, but certainly it helps to look outside the Scriptures to get clarification on contested issues
This is where the Protestant parts way with the Roman Catholic. When confronted by a "contested issue" we are to "search the Scriptures," as the Bereans did, to see if this be so.
And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works." -- 2 Timothy 3:14-17"But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them;
A good example of a useful teaching aid is the WESTMINSTER CONFESSION OF FAITH
Of the 33 chapters in the WCF, the very first one is "Of the Holy Scriptures"...
Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost." -- 2 Peter 1:19-21"IV. The authority of the Holy Scripture, for which it ought to be believed, and obeyed, depends not upon the testimony of any man, or Church; but wholly upon God (who is truth itself) the author thereof: and therefore it is to be received, because it is the Word of God.[9]
(9) "We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts:
Which means the Scriptures came about not through the will of men, but through the will of God as they were instructed by the Holy Spirit.
The episcopacy existed and was authoritative while the apostles were living, and it appears the church had no problem with that for the first 16 centuries of its existence.
There is no evidence in Scripture that the office and purpose of the apostles were carried on beyond the apostles. The preaching of the Gospel fell to disciples, of which you and I are numbered. The true church of Jesus Christ exists, but it is not confided to Rome. It is made up of all those given true faith in Jesus Christ as Lord, King and Savior, by the grace of God alone.
The millennium of the "Dark Ages" wasn't called that for nothing. They were "dark" because the bishop of Rome was usurping the power and position of the Holy Spirit. An error that continues to this day.
Despite any such alleged ability, they turned away from Scripture and the Gospel and manufactured countless traditions of men.
The office and purpose was, so far as I can tell, tied to the proclamation of the Gospel. I'm not convinced there was a divine fiat that called for a line of demarcation between the office of presbyter and bishop, but it does seem to me that the apostles were extending the authority they'd received from Christ to the overseers, and the people given a charge over those overseers (like Timothy).
You may be correct that there is no direct command, but through the example of Timothy and the laying on of hands for deacons in Acts 6, we find a pattern that is alluded to in early extra-biblical writings. I've mentioned the example of Ignatius of Antioch. He writes very early and he just assumes the pattern of a three-office succession. So, while I don't necessarily disagree that there is no specific command to pass the torch from the apostles, I do believe there is an early Scriptural episcopal pattern that is validated by the way the church functioned by no later than A.D. 67; the year that Ignatius was appointed bishop by Peter (Theodoret, Dial. Immutab., I, iv, 33a).
They were "dark" because the bishop of Rome was usurping the power and position of the Holy Spirit.
And yet God chose to use this vessel as the means by which to spread the Gospel message for some 1500+ years. Here's the thing...I do believe Protestants (myself included) to have all the gifts of the Holy Spirit. What I do not understand is why so many Protestants assume that Catholics have a distorted view of the papacy. Loyalty to the bishop was simply a given by the close of the first century at the latest. I cannot see why we would condemn them for maintaining that particular teaching, even as we may disagree with some of their doctrinal conclusions.