[lockeliberty]

You still come down to the same old problem in the final analysis - WHO decides whether any teaching supports the Apostolic tradition?

Simply, those teachers and theologians who strictly adhere to the rule of Faith. The RCC gave up that right when it added non-apostolic tradition to the rule of Faith.

[Tantumergo]

"Simply, those teachers and theologians who strictly adhere to the rule of Faith."

You get straight back to the same problem that the "solos" have - How do you decide which teachers and theologians strictly adhere to the rule of faith?

In what you propose it still falls on the shoulders of the fallible, non-omniscient, time-bound individual believer to judge which of their potential "elders" or "teachers" are orthodox according to their own personal criteria.

"The RCC gave up that right when it added non-apostolic tradition to the rule of Faith."

Again WHO so decides that any non-apostolic tradition has been added? Who conferred authority on you to make this judgement?

You are simply asserting your personal and individual opinion, measured according to your personal and individual understanding of what scripture and the "Rule of faith" teaches.

It is this same absolutist individualism which has bedevilled the heirs of the Reformation with the spirit of schism for the last 450 years.