百宝箱

下面是一封可直接随 R&R 稿件一并提交的 Cover Letter（回应审稿意见版）。

语气定位为：谦逊、专业、具体，但不自我贬低——这是编辑最愿意点开全文的版本。

你只需把期刊名 / 稿件编号 / 编辑姓名替换即可。

Dear Editor,

Thank you for the opportunity to revise and resubmit the manuscript entitled

“Life, Constitution, and Eschatological Fulfillment.”

I am grateful for the careful and constructive feedback provided by you and the anonymous reviewers. The comments were both challenging and clarifying, and they have significantly strengthened the manuscript.

In preparing this revised version, I have sought not merely to defend the original argument, but to address the reviewers’ concerns through substantive and verifiable revisions. In particular, the manuscript has been revised in the following ways:

First, in response to concerns regarding the relationship between ontological language and redemptive-historical eschatology, I have added a new subsection explicitly affirming the parousia, final judgment, and new creation as necessary conditions for eschatological fulfillment. The revised text now clarifies that ontological fulfillment is not an alternative to redemptive history, but its eschatological consequence.

Second, to address questions about participation and the use of Eastern Christian categories, I have added a methodological clarification explaining the study’s deliberately minimalist and descriptive ontological approach. References to theosis and related metaphysical frameworks have been carefully reframed to indicate methodological bracketing rather than denial, and the scope limitations of the present study are now stated more explicitly.

Third, in response to concerns about the interpretation of the New Jerusalem, I have introduced a new hermeneutical subsection clarifying the function of apocalyptic symbolism. The revised argument emphasizes that an ontological reading does not exclude spatial or historical dimensions, but seeks to articulate their theological significance, in dialogue with established apocalyptic scholarship.

A detailed, point-by-point response to each reviewer’s comments is included in the accompanying “Response to Reviewers” document, indicating precisely where revisions have been made.

I hope that these revisions demonstrate careful engagement with the reviewers’ critiques and clarify the intended scope, method, and contribution of the manuscript. I am grateful again for the opportunity to revise the work and would welcome any further guidance you may have.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Sincerely,

Samuel Liu—

使用建议（非常重要）

提交顺序：
1. Revised Manuscript
2. Response to Reviewers
3. Cover Letter（这封）
若是 SJT / IJST / Modern Theology：这封信的“防御强度”刚刚好，不会显得过度解释。
不要在投稿系统的 Comments to the Editor 里重复全文，只需一句：

“Please see the attached cover letter for a summary of revisions.”