author had for the meaning of a text is thetext itself. Gracia calls this situation "hermeneutical limbo" and as long as we remain focused only on meaninginterpretation we cannot break free from this circularity. "[I]n short in order to understand a revealed text we cannot refer back to the text or the intention of the divinity; we must refer to something else that gives us the key asto how to understand the text" (p. 68). Gracia adds that this something else needs to pick out the fact that somepeople, the intended recipients of the revelation, are in a better position to understand the revelation than others.What puts them in a better position, and what ultimately allows us to "escape the hermeneutics circle" is thetheological context to which the reveled text contributes. The text is recognized as a revealed text from within atheological context and that context provides the background for understanding the meanings of the terms andthe views found in the text.. Gracia's conclusion, then, is that we should think about interpreting a revealed text as providing us with themeaning intended by the divine author, however that cannot function as a criterion for a proper interpretation. Asa criterion it is empty. To complete Gracia's case we need to look at his arguments that theologicalinterpretations are the appropriate form of relational interpretation. Gracia's develops his points through criticizingthe practice of relying on literary and/or sociological interpretations to the exclusion of theological interpretations. Literary interpretations focus on interpreting the literary features of the text, or if the literary features belong tothe identity conditions of the text, on interpreting the text through interpreting its literary devices. Only, however,if the literary features of the text are essential to the meaning of a text is literary interpretation necessary. In fact,since in cases of revealed texts the purpose of the text is to conve...
