Not that this is going to add here to what the others have excellently expressed, but I was reading of an apostate
Russian princess [she doesn't get a capital on her title as a result] from the 19th century. She apostasized while in Switzerland to the Anglican sect. However, her arguments were much more close to Calvinists, Methodists and other Protestant groups. Her husband, Prince Michael, was distraught at her behavior. She had taken their eldest daughter who also converted to the same abomination and the 2 were residing outside of his reach. So he asked a nimble-minded English theologian to attempt to bring his wayward family members to their senses.
The princess, a clear case of histrionic personality disorder, was reveling in the barrage of negative attention she received from her apostasy.
She staged drama after drama to keep her name in the public eye, inbetween claiming to be 'persecuted', 'a martyr', etc.
Here is the point of this vignette. She told the Englishman how he was not permitted by her to use arguments based on Church Councils, the writings of various Bishops and those of the Early Church Fathers : these were all invalid.
She insisted that only the Bible was an authority for her; all the rest were false.
That was shocking to me that even a personage born into Orthodoxy could be so intolerant of Church Councils and dismissive of prominent theologians and the Fathers. This Russian woman was so stubborn on this point that the Englishman only succeeded in bringing back the eldest daughter, Princess Zinaida, to Orthodoxy. That in itself was a remarkable achievement, the talk of "tout St Petersburg" in the early 1840s. The story has a happy ending in this respect. But the mother, who seemed to be more of an evangelical than an Anglican, was unmoved by any deft arguments that did not originate in Scripture directly. Strange...