The Bible, of course being inspired by the wisest being who could ever have lived, is a very robust defence against all kinds of heresy. From small heresies that barely affect doctrine all the way to entire apostate Churches, no falsehood can stand when a Christian, armed with the knowledge of scripture, steps onto the battlefield.
But can the Bible be taken alone? There are those who claim that we require extra help to understand it. Whereas Sola Scriptura is both indisputably taught in scripture, and is just common sense, certain heretics claim we need (their interpretation of) Church history in order to fully understand what it says.
The truth, however, is that Church history is not the context of scripture. When the Biblical writers wrote scripture, they didn't have Chrysostom, Augustine, Luther, Calvin, Ignatius, Aquinas, or any other future figure in mind. Neither did any audience up until the time these people wrote their stuff. That's not to say all, or even any of these people were heretics, but it does mean that their views were irrelevant to the actual context of the scriptures. They read the scriptures just as we do. They read the scriptures just as we do. They did not write the scriptures. They did not have some kind of divine insight into the scriptures. Their views are as irrelevant as any pastor's today.
And we can be grateful for this, as not only did they contradict each other, and themselves, they also contradicted the scriptures in numerous ways. Some serious, some not so much. Augustine was a sexist, believing women were worth nothing other than childbearing. Jerome believed sex even within the marriage bed was adultery, except for the purpose of childbearing. Justin Martyr believed the Jews bore the marks of circumcision so that they would be punished. Chrysostom went further, claiming that Christians must hate Jews, even subjugate them, because God hates them.
Suffice to say, the Jewish authors of the New Testament, writing on behalf of the Jewish Messiah, who so loved the Jews that He gave His life to cover their sins, should not be interpreted in light of filthy anti-semites who lived decades, even centuries later. That's not to say we can't gain anything by reading the works of Christian writers prior to ourselves. It does, however, mean that we should put them in their proper place. They are not a lens through which we should read the scriptures, they are fellow students of it. And frankly, very few of them would earn an A grade.
Once we have stripped away the Church history argument, all we are left with are the pure, unedited words of God, given to us for doctrine, reproof, correction, and instruction in righteousness, that we, as Christians, may be complete, and thoroughly equipped for every good work (see 2 Timothy 3:16-17). No heretic can compete with that, even if they can find a Church "Father" to agree with them.