“We will prove that we worship him reasonably; for we have learned that he is the Son of the true God himself, that he holds a second place, and the Spirit of prophecy a third. For this they accuse us of madness, saying that we attribute to a crucified man a place second to the unchangeable and eternal God, the Creator of all things; but they are ignorant of the mystery which lies therein” (First Apology 13:5–6 [A.D. 151])

"Therefore the Father is Lord, and the Son is Lord, and the Father is God, and the Son is God; for He who is born of God is God."

I'd say they inheret God's nature here, as I will once again reference the very simple concept of a father having a son does not make them the same as one another, but "like father like son" applies instead. Also the authority the Father passed onto the Son after He obeyed Him fully

"We, however, as we indeed always have done... believe that there is one only God, but under the following dispensation, or as it is called, economy; that this one only God has also a Son, His Word, who proceeded from Himself, by whom all things were made and without whom nothing was made. Him we believe to have been sent by the Father into the virgin, and to have been born of her—being both man and God, the Son of man and the Son of God... We believe also in the Holy Spirit, who has been sent by Christ from the Father as the Sanctifier and Comforter, as the Teacher of the truth... who proceeds from the Father and the Son."

I agree with these 3 parts more or less. I don't really think we're at odds, perhaps only in dogmatic termonology. I would be interested in walking through the scriptures though, and yes I think I follow 'solo scriptora'. Basically what's in the scriptures is placed higher than what people say about them. The hashing out of what they mean is part of the journey on earth for a believer imo.