A useful article from  Philip B. Payne discussing the common misconception of equating meaning of a Biblical Text with the Human author’s intent, which doesn’t take into account the dual authorship of Scripture, both the human author and the Holy Spirit (a useful critique of the grammatical-historical hermeneutic):

http://www.etsjets.org/files/JETS-PDFs/20/20-3/20-3-pp243-252_JETS.pdf

Here is a brief excerpt of the article, from Beale’s book:

“The correct understanding of the meaning of the text is that which accounts for all of the text, puts it together as a coherent development of ideas and arguments, and takes into account its total context.
Unhappily, some of those who wish to preserve objectivity and to place a limitation on uncontrolled allegorical exegesis have based their hermeneutical system on the intention of the secondary (human) author. But it is precisely the conjectured intention of this author that has been used at times to justify an interpretation the text itself cannot bear. While it is true that a proper investigation of the intention of the human author can put a check on uncontrolled exegesis, this is more effectively accomplished when the foundational role of the text is recognized and argument proceeds from the text in its total context, including any elucidation given by the rest of Scripture.
The classical hermeneutical principle of analogia Scripturae states that we must interpret each passage in the light of, and in harmony with, other Scriptures. As the Westminster Confession of Faith 1, 9 puts it:

The infallible rule of interpretation of Scripture is the Scripture itself; and therefore, when there is a question about the true and full sense of any Scripture (which is not manifold, but one), it may be searched and known by other places that speak more clearly.

If we were to limit meaning to the human author’s intention we would have no basis for using the analogy of Scripture to check present-day interpretations that conflict with other teachings of Scripture. This principle of analogia Scripturae assumes correctly that our primary task is to understand God’s intention, not fundamentally the human author’s. After all, the Bible is God’s Word.”
G. K. Beale, The Right Doctrine from the Wrong Texts?: Essays on the Use of the Old Testament in the New (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 1994), 80–81.

For more articles like this discussing hermeneutics and the NT use of the OT see G.K. Beale’s book, The Right Doctrine from the Wrong Texts? Essays on the Use of the Old Testament in the New (Payne’s article appears as chapter 4 in Beale’s book):

http://www.amazon.com/The-Right-Doctrine-Wrong-Texts/dp/0801010888/ref=tmm_pap_title_0?ie=UTF8&qid=1374637898&sr=8-1

http://www.logos.com/product/5330/the-right-doctrine-from-the-wrong-texts-essays-on-the-use-of-the-old-testament-in-the-new

(Note: I don’t agree with Payne’s views on egalitarianism and other issues, just a word of discretion on his other materials online, but his insight in the article above on hermeneutics is very useful)