Higher authority. The Gospels actually quote Christ. They are not 'revelations' as such but an eyewitness account (and Luke's Gospel is actually an exception as it is a second-hand 'witness' collected from those who did witness Him first-hand) and as such they are the norm against which all others have to conform.
No other writing can be equal to them. Equality is not the message of the Bible. If anything, the Bible could be considered profoundly anti-egalitarian and anti-democratic. For even Christ admits (and I can see where the Arians got their ideas from) "for the Father is greater than I" [John 14:28]
Well, I will give you full credit for acknowledging that Paul does teach those things
I am not saying that's what he is teaching; that's what the Protestants say he is teaching. My point is that the Church does not treat all of the scripture the same way. It never quotes from the Chronicles or the Kings (historical books) because neither did Christ in the Gospels, nor are they listed in the 'canon' mentioned by Christ (cf. Luke 24: 44).
Along these lines we could also throw in Jesus' synthesis of the two greatest Commandments. However, Jesus would never say to forget about the rest. He never says there is anything wrong with the full list of ten. He says they are all 100% correct. So, while there may be an apparent hierarchy, in no way does that diminish the rest. I think it is the same with the Bible in general. I have no problem with zooming in on the Gospels, but I don't think that in any way diminishes the epistles, etc. I don't think they contradict in any way.
My point is that the Church does not treat all of the scripture the same way. It never quotes from the Chronicles or the Kings (historical books) because neither did Christ in the Gospels, nor are they listed in the 'canon' mentioned by Christ (cf. Luke 24: 44).
I think that is unfortunate, and I don't see how that squares with "All scripture is God-breathed". Does the Church follow that, and do you think that all scripture is purely infallible? I'm trying to figure if you don't quote from the books you mention because there are only so many days in the year, or whether the Church does not really believe they are authority.
BTW, shame on me for not being able to remember the reasoning, but I thought it was Blogger who earlier showed that the historical OT books you mention are included under the Prophets.