It strikes me that in a lot of traditions you are expected to take a body of teachings “on faith”. You are supposed to commit without knowing exactly what these teachings are, usually you find out about them afterwards from some kind of book. Even in buddhism I remember from my early days at the Gelug Tibetan Buddhist temple that we got a “basics course” and were told that a lot of the topics covered were elaborated in these little booklets written mostly by the Dagpo Rinpoche, which we were assured we could borrow.
Now the Buddha said to “test the teachings”, which seems to me a more sensible approach, but how can you test them if you do not know them? If you come across a tradition with a large amount of teachings and you think it may be for you, are you going to need to study for years before you can definitely call yourself a member with views aligning to theirs?
Or are you going to admit that there is no such thing as aligned views, only the absorption of limited amounts of teaching which you can make your own, that you can never call yourself a member of any tradition? You can only keep learning, but to say you are a Theravadan or even just a Buddhist may be going too far.