aMorePerfectUnion:
Well, it appears some of that Catholic thought has not totally left you!! From the bible alone, you can’t get those Doctrinal Definitions. That does not mean, they are inconsistent with Scripture but as you noted, you did do some studying of Church History and the entire Arian crisis started due to Arius’s interpretation of Proverbs 8:22-31 and its prefiguration to St. John’s Gospel prologue and the Word became Flesh [John 1: 1-14].
So individuals and the Bible alone can, as demonstrated in history, lead to heretical doctrines. So in my view, the Arian crisis and how the Church dealt with it reflects the Church, and the reading and understanding of the Scripture in light of the theological development within the Church as expressed via the Patristic consensus and how the Church worshiped in Liturgy, which both reflect the Tradition of the Church, all worked together at the Council of Nicea in 325 AD to resolve the Arian heresy.
The Church used both tools, the Scripture and Tradition to formulate its Doctrine against Arius and his followers. The Bible alone [Sola Scriptura] does not get you to the Nicene Creed’s Definition in Latin of Consubstantial union of Christ with the Father.
I’m glad we agree on the truth of the nature of the Savior.
“The Church used both tools, the Scripture and Tradition to formulate its Doctrine”
Not so much. That anyone leaves out part of the truth of Scripture is the degree to which they create a falsehood. The entire truth has always been there. Tradition did not resolve this issue in history. It was resolved by reasoning through the entire revelation about His nature.
Almost every major doctrine of Christianity was accepted because it answered the most questions and raised the fewest problems in its expression. In this instance, how Jesus Christ could be both God and man. It was answered by reasoning out the totality of what is revealed in the Bible - not by appealing to some tradition.
As a side note... Does this mean we have every major doctrine perfectly right?? No, not necessarily. It means that out of every possible way to put together the totality of what we know from Scripture, the historic church chose the expression that best fit and created the fewest problems.
God revealed what He wanted us to know - not everything He knows. We see through a mirror dimly, but in that future we will see as He sees.
In the meantime God has gifted to His Gathering teachers, among others. They not only present truth, but they correct error.