regenerates and cleanses within; and a separate second experience of the
Spirit, which is logically (and often temporally) subsequent to the experi-
ence of conversion, in which the Spirit empowers charismatically for ser-
vice to others. This sort of interpretation gives both authors their due. It
affi rms their distinctive voices as well as their individual authority.
B IBLICAL HERMENEUTICS AND EXPERIENTIAL
CORRELATION
As sketched above, Hirsch’s key insight is that meaning must be located
within some consciousness, either that of the author or the reader. But what
is a Christian to say about the mind of God in this process? While it is quite
common to associate the Holy Spirit with the creation of the text through
inspiration and with the reader’s appropriation of the text through the Spirit’s
illumination, I would like to suggest a third way the Spirit is active. Hirsch
describes how interpreters use correlation as the vehicle to fi nd present-day
signifi cance for ancient texts. Eco amplifi es this with his discussion of the way
conjecture and testing must be employed in any act of interpretation. When
reading the Bible, much of this conjecture and testing takes place within
the domains of historical reconstruction, contextual analysis, or lexical study:
Does this scenario or that scenario fi t the relevant data better?
But what if biblical texts may be open in a way beyond what Eco imag-
ines? What if they invite the reader not just to share in the creation of
meaning/signifi cance through the use of his imagination? What if they
sometimes invite the reader—as I think they do—to participate in a par-
ticular spiritual experience? Is it not possible that the semiotic conjecture
and testing Eco describes leads readers to conclude they have experienced
exactly those experiences described in Acts or in 1 Corinthians? Many
Pentecostal testimonies make precisely this claim.
How should this sort of testing be described? I think “experiential cor-
relation” is as helpful a term as any. While experiential correlation is not
as readily subject to academic discussion and debate as the lexical mean-
ing of words or Greek social practices in the fi rst century, it is still sub-
ject to the constraints of biblical description and the spiritual testing of
the community (which is largely what 1 Corinthians 12–14 is all about).
In fact, if one reads certain biblical texts that describe spiritual experi-
ences without being able to draw on correlative personal experience, it
may properly be questioned whether the reader has appropriately “re-cog-
nized” (i.e., understood) what she has read.
ECHOING HIRSCH: DO READERS FIND OR CONSTRUCT MEANING? 97