The Lord’s Supper as a Spiritually Formative Experience of Scripture

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

See attached.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Comment 1: First, on p. 4( The Feast of Creation and Re-Creation), the author needs to define or specify
what is messianic feast. Moreover, in what sense is it connected to the Lord s Supper? It is
unclear that simply eating and drinking with the people reflects Jesus s words at the Lords
Supper. 

Response: At the end of the first paragraph under this heading I have added material to explain the connection more fully. This is marked using "track changes."

Comment 2: Second, since to demonstrate the spiritually formative character of the Lord s Supper is the
significant part of this study, I wonder if the author might be able to say more about it in
conjunction with the author s observations of various biblical themes in the study

Response: At multiple points through the piece I have added explanation of the spiritually formative aspects of the argument, aiming to make this application clearer and more explicit. These are marked with "track changes."

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

 

In the first paragraph, I didn’t understand the connection between focus on historical Jesus and Lord’s Supper as spiritual formation. Historical Jesus scholars aren’t typically focused on spiritual formation. There’s a mention later of Sanders and Wright, but in the context of why Jesus’ offer of forgiveness to sinners scandalized.

 

Page 1, second paragraph – a little oblique; why not state specifically here to which “critical episode” the Lord’s Supper refers and which “other themes and events in the Scriptural canon” are also present as allusions.

 

Page 2, par.4 – is the disciples’ response really “stubborn unbelief” or incomprehension? Some conflation here of willful stubbornness and failure to understand.

 

Would be strengthened by a few additional citations/sources:

·      e.g., a source for the claim that “the church later demanded communicants confess a worthy awareness of the atoning work of the cross” (p.3)

·      on page 6, the claim that the wealthy Corinthians’ neglect of the hungry was likely exacerbated by a famine

Author Response

Comment 1: In the first paragraph, I didn’t understand the connection between focus on historical Jesus and Lord’s Supper as spiritual formation. Historical Jesus scholars aren’t typically focused on spiritual formation. There’s a mention later of Sanders and Wright, but in the context of why Jesus’ offer of forgiveness to sinners scandalized.

Response: I have revised language in the first paragraph to clarify how the aims of historical Jesus studies leave room for the aim of this paper, affirming the very point the reviewer makes that historical Jesus scholars aren't focused on spiritual formation.

Comment 2: Page 1, second paragraph – a little oblique; why not state specifically here to which “critical episode” the Lord’s Supper refers and which “other themes and events in the Scriptural canon” are also present as allusions.

Response: I have added specifics to end the suspense.

Comment 3: Page 2, par.4 – is the disciples’ response really “stubborn unbelief” or incomprehension? Some conflation here of willful stubbornness and failure to understand.

I have altered the language to allow a range of understandings of the disciples' response.

Comment 4: 

Would be strengthened by a few additional citations/sources:

• e.g., a source for the claim that “the church later demanded communicants confess a worthy awareness of the atoning work of the cross” (p.3)
• on page 6, the claim that the wealthy Corinthians’ neglect of the hungry was likely exacerbated by a famine

Response: I have provided parenthetical references for each statement, and the works are listed in the closing references list.