How is Sola Scriptura incoherent?

Nuda scriptura is scripture alone. Sola scriptura looks at the writings and the traditions, with the writings (source of the traditions) having greater relevance.

For example, Jesus has a God …

A Trinity was first mentioned as G-d, His Word and His Wisdom, by Theophilus of Antioch.

An AIDS orphan, a pastor and his frantic search for the meds that keep her alive - NPR

Later, Tertullian would lay the foundations of the Trinity.

But if you read it through the filter of the traditions of a Trinity, you will miss it (like many miss Jesus telling Mary about Mary’s G-d being Jesus’s G-d). That is incoherent.

But it was not until the efforts to create a uniform Christianity at Nicaea that the concept became the accepted tradition, to create a universal (catholic) interpretation of the writings.

Heavy rains suspend play at US Open, raising the possibility of a Monday finish to the final round - CNN

Considering that the traditions stem from interpretations based off the writings, sola scriptura would be the means to test the coherency of the traditions.

The New Testament identifies Jesus. Literally, spelling it out in Acts 3.

John 20:17] Jesus said to her, “Do not cling to Me, for I have not yet ascended to My Father; but go to My brethren and say to them, ‘I am ascending to My Father and your Father, and to My God and your God.’ ”

Do you think it is likely that Maegor was presented a young dragon at some point, almost to the point of full-bonding, only to scorn it for Balerion in the end? If so, which one could it have been?

So, how does that affect the Athanasian Christian doctrine of the Trinity?

How is Sola Scriptura incoherent?

Read also: