I understand what you are speaking of.
Bottom line is scripture DOES define and interpret itself. It doesn't need men. Men are used of God no doubt. IF you say that something is not the traditional way you were taught and refuse to look at anything else then tradition is not helping you it is hindering you.
The Holy Spirit does use people, those you have an established relationship with, in order to get through on issues we may be subjective on. That is normal. Your example is based on circular reasoning, so does NOT hold water.
John 20:31
these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.
Tradition does not help in this regard. God's word does, along with the Holy Spirit. I may use tradition to get a perspective on how long something has been in the church, but it is NOT tradition that I follow, as both Jesus and Paul warned.
Ignore their warnings at your own peril.
Ok. Point me then to the inspired table of contents.
The table of Contents should complete the following tasks that is completed by the table of contents of any compiled book:
1. This fully God-breathed, inerrant Table of Contents must have been written by one of the authors of the compiled books
2. It must be an inerrant list of exactly which books are in the Bible, to the exclusion of all others.
3. It must say who wrote the books, and when they were written.
The problem is, you cannot give me that table of contents. A Table of Contents defines a book. It tells exactly what is in the book. Because the Table of Contents is NOT God-Breathed Scripture, your Table of Contents is the work of man. Period. End of discussion. The Table of Contents is tradition. That tradition is allowed to define Scripture.
Therefore no, you do not have Scripture as supreme authority. IT is theologically impossible, because God did NOT give us a table of contents until 300 years after. The canon is not written by the Apostles or the Prophets. It was written by man. Therefore you break your own rules, which say you may not have a tradition over Scripture, but you DO. It is inescapable unless you also say "I only THINK these are His Scripture. I cannot know this epistemologically like I know that 1+1=2"
This is why Paul commanded "Hold fast to my Traditions (literally: Paradosis, that which is handed down from those who came before), whether by my WORD (spoken Tradition) or my epistle (Written Tradition in Scripture)
Both are placed on equal level, because both were what drove the Church for 300 years.
Without any Scripture whatsoever, the Church in the area of Lyons of the 2nd century led the charge against Gnostic heresies and evangelized an entire country for Christ.
Their own leader, St. Irenaeus, said that happened because of their strict adherence to "
that tradition which originates from the apostles, [and] which is preserved by means of the succession of presbyters in the Churches" (Against Heresies Volume 3, Chapter 2, verse 2)
And this was the Tradition to which they held:
"...carefully preserving the ancient tradition, believing in one God, the Creator of heaven and earth, and all things therein, by means of Christ Jesus, the Son of God; who, because of His surpassing love towards His creation, condescended to be born of the virgin, He Himself uniting man through Himself to God, and having suffered under Pontius Pilate, and rising again, and having been received up in splendour, shall come in glory, the Saviour of those who are saved, and the Judge of those who are judged, and sending into eternal fire those who transform the truth, and despise His Father and His advent." (St. Irenaeus, ibid, 3. 4. 2.)