The Benefits of an Author-Oriented Approach to Hermeneutics, JETS, Robert H. Stein

Summary by Jason Case

Stein’s article is a defense of his position that the author should determine the meaning of text.  Stein starts the article with the basic components of communication being the author, the text and the reader and proceeds to give a short history of thought regarding where meaning has been found.  Stein states that at the beginning of the 20th century the general assumption was that the author was the determiner of the text’s meaning. However in the 30s New Criticism began to seek meaning in the text itself as an independent entity. More recently, the reader-oriented criticism argues that the reader gives meaning to a text.

Stein’s understanding of “meaning” involves construction of thought, a property of thinking persons.  Hence, text cannot “mean” anything because it cannot intend or purpose anything.  Stein talks of how scholars have also placed meaning in the “event” referred to in the text.  18th and 19th century attempts to find “meaning” in miracle accounts sought for meaning either in the author’s conscious deception (the accomodationists), their subconsciousness (the mythophiles) or in the event (the rationalists) (454).

Stein believes “the question of where the meaning of a text is to be found is … the major issue that faces Biblical scholarship” (454).  Stein’s greatest argument in favor of author determined meaning is that it is the common sense approach to all communication.  Stein uses a great illustration about whether a person’s last will and testament should be read according to deceased’s consciously willed meaning. Stein follows this by stating that not only is the author-oriented approach to meaning the common sense approach to interpreting the Bible, it is also the one that best fits an evangelical view of the Bible’s inspiration (456).

Stein makes a defense against “intentional fallacy” before launching into to a section on vocabulary, and a section on advantages of the author-oriented meaning.  Some scholars argue that it is impossible for a person to climb into the mind of an author and experience what he was going through when he wrote, but Stein makes the counter point that these scholars are confusing “mental acts” with meaning.  “Meaning” is not the process the author went through in writing a text, but rather what the author consciously willed to convey (456).

Stein then launches into a section where he defines meaning, implications, significance and subject matter.  Meaning is defined as “the paradigm or principle that the author consciously willed to convey by the sharable symbols he or she used (457).”  Implications are “sub-meanings of a text that legitimately fall within the paradigm or principle willed by the author (458).”  Significance refers to “how the reader responds to the willed meaning of the author (460).”  Subject matter is “the content or ‘stuff’ talked about in the text (461).”

In addition to the advantages of author-determined meaning being common sense, treating literature as other forms of communication, avoiding confusion between the willed meaning and the process or “mental acts” which produced the work are others given at the end of the article (462).  A final advantage Stein gives for author-oriented meaning is that it avoids the need of seeking a different and separate divine meaning in difficult texts (463).  A single, author-determined meaning causes us to interpret prophecy figuratively and metaphorically that which is often taught to interpret literally (464).

Stein closes by stating that the author-oriented “hermeneutic is holistic, it agrees with the rules of all communication; it can be applied to all literature and all genres, and has less difficulties associated with it than any other alternative (466).