What do you think about John Webster’s take on “revelation,” under the context of Scripture?:
Yet at the very same time that the doctrine was eviscerated in this way, the demands placed upon it increased to a point where they became insupportable. 
Perhaps the most significant symptom of this is the way in which Christian theological talk of revelation migrates to the beginning of the dogmatic corpus, and has to take on the job of furnishing the epistemological warrants for Christian claims. This absorption of revelation into foundations has two effects. First, it promotes the hypertrophy of revelation by making it responsible for providing the platform on which all subsequent Christian teaching is erected; and thereby, second, it exacerbates the isolation of talk of revelation from the material dogmatic considerations (Trinity, incarnation, Spirit, church) through its mislocation and its reassignment to undertake duties which it was not intended to perform. This latter aspect of the fate of Christian teaching about revelation had particularly damaging consequences for Christian theological thinking about the nature of Scripture. For alongside the hypertrophy of revelation and its migration into epistemology, there develops a parallel process whereby revelation and Scripture are strictly identified. As this happens, then Scripture’s role as the principium cognoscendi of Christian faith and theology comes to be thought of in such a way that Scripture precedes and warrants all other Christian doctrines as the formal principle from which those other doctrines are deduced. (John Webster, Holy Scripture: A Dogmatic Sketch, 12-13)
[hypertrophy=abnormal enlargement of a body part or organ: so in Webster’s usage, the concept of “revelation” is enlarged to the point that it is made bigger, and broadened beyond the scope that it was intended when it is supposed to bear the weight of functioning as the foundation for Christian epistemology]
Does this jive with your conception of Scripture? Do you see it as the foundation and epistemological ground wherein you believe that its primary purpose is to serve as the furniture store for furnishing your theological living room? Or do you see Scripture as a place where God brings you into dialogue with Him, as the place where you are included in the Triune speech; and thus a place where you are enveloped into the divine dialogue that inheres between the Father and the Son by the Holy Spirit? Or do you think that my questions create a false dichotomy either/or situation? Or?
Athanasian Reformed 