JESUS AND OLD TESTAMENT PROPHECY WITH PROFESSOR JOHN J.

COLLINS

An introduction about the blogging theology and welcoming the Professor who will talk

and discuss the topic.

Vlogger: John is the holmes professor of Old Testament criticism and interpretation at Yale

Divinity School. He has noted for his research in the Hebrew Bible and the dead sea scrolls and

their relation to Christian origins.

John is married to Professor Adela Yabro Collins professor of New Testament at Yale Divinity

School with whom he has co-authored the excellent book. This is it here king and messiah as son

of God divine human and angelic messianic figures in Biblical and related literature. This is

heavy weight book and I really recommend it if you’re interested in the academic side of this

discussion.

Also, he is editor of the newly published work the Jerome Biblical Commentary for the 21 st

Century. This is a weighty tome Third fully revised edition which has an introduction by Pope

Francis. And I’m sure it will be a central reading for the student of the Bible and I as an

undergraduate had an earlier edition of the work which was very good indeed.

Now, today, John has very kindly agreed to talk to us about the Jewish Scriptures and Early

Christianity so if I may perhaps begin by asking the following question and it concerns the

famous and often quoted passage in the book of Isaiah usually known as Isaiah 53. Is it correct to

say that the famous servant song of Isaiah to be precise Isaiah 52:11 to 53:12. Appears to have
played no role in pre-christian Judaism as a text for telling the coming of a messiah and if so

would it be Christians who seem to be the first ones to identify this as a proof text after the

crucifixion of Jesus.

John Collins: Yes and by coincidence, I was doing this text in class yesterday.

Vlogger: Oh my goodness.

John Collins: Teaching of course and the messiah. Although I am now officially retired, I’m

doing a kind of encore course on this so and now it’s a very interesting text. And you know if

you grow up Christian it’s hard not to think of it as messianic because this is how the messiah

came to be understood eventually in Christianity. And what was different about it in its time is

that what would it mean to be saved? So what do you need to be saved from?

I’d say the typical answer to that in the ancient world not just in Judaism, is you need to be saved

from foreign occupation, hunger, plagues, you know various kinds of misfortune and therefore in

many places, the world has not changed too much in this regard in many places people think You

need a strong central figure a ruler you know the enumerage the in Babylon is typical in this

regard. If you want to be safe from chaos rally round your strong central leader and as you don’t

have to believe the point that this team Is very much with us to the present day. Okay, in the what

you get in the servant song of Isaiah which I think was quite novel at the time is that what you

really need to be saved from sin and the whole world needs to be saved needs to be saved from

sin.

Now again, this idea all right was around you’ll get us in the cult typically in Leviticus or

whatever but you know applied to the whole political situation you know the problem

confronting the prophet here is that the Babylonian exile. You know, when Israel was almost
wiped off the map, indeed what many people would have assumed that it had been wiped off the

map and then it has what he saw as a miraculous comeback when cyrus the persian took over.

Now but the explanation then is the question is, If God wanted to restore Jerusalem and glorify

it, why did he put it through this whole misery of the Babylonian exile? And the idea in second

Isaiah is that the suffering itself was redemptive and as I understand the passage I’m giving you a

highly simplified version of it here. The idea was that the turnaround would be so spectacular.

That the fate of Judah had been so terrible it had been so given up for dead that nobody expected

to come back. And then, when it is restored, this would astonish all the nations and they would

think it their God must be the real God. We should all go worship him but that of course didn’t

quite happen, but, that I would say was what that poem meant in its original time. Now when you

read it and there are still many scholars who think that it’s actually talking about an individual.

Perhaps the King who died in exile or perhaps the prophet, I don’t subscribe to that because in

order to subscribe to it you have to deposit a lot of history for which we have no other evidence

and I think it’s simpler to just apply it to the Jewish people. But at the same time, you know it

was language that could easily be applied to an individual and so many text in the Hebrew Bible

were applied to future individuals and treated as messianic prophecies and this one as far as I can

see was not. now you will get allusions to some of the servant poems in Isaiah and not it’s a very

interesting text in the book of Enoch, the liturds of Enoch where there’s a figure called that son

of man and that son of man is said to be a light to the gentiles or light to the nations. And that’s a

motif picked up those poems in Isaiah. But he is not said to save people by his suffering. You

know the motif of redemptive suffering is not picked up there. In the dead sea scrolls. We have

the figure called the teacher of righteousness.

thanksgiving hymns had what you might call a servant complex. he saw himself as the servant

who was being abused by everybody for whom nobody had any respect. But God would rescue

him and glorify him but it’s never suggested that His suffering would save anybody else.

In the book, at the end of the book of Daniel, you have the people who are called the wives in

Hebrew. It’s mass killing and the term is picked up from this fourth servant song which says you

know behold my servant will prosper and that’s the verb and these are the wives and they

apparently are put to death. But then, they’re raised up and lifted up to the stars but It’s never

suggested that by doing that they were saving anybody else. So as I understand that the first

interpretation of that poem in terms of Savior figure was in the case of Jesus and in a way you

might say that interpretation was almost forced upon the followers of Jesus because I think they

had already decided that he was the messiah. And the messiah was not supposed to be crucified

Vlogger: but this is the thing John isn’t it because there seems to be no firm evidence to suggest

expectations of a suffering messiah in pre-Christian, Judaism. Would you agree?

John Collins: That is absolutely right, yeah, the typical expectation of a messiah is somebody

who would smash heads but he’d be a violent figure who would drive out the romans you know a

hundred years after Jesus a man named barcok came along who led a revolt against rome.

One of the stories about bark cockpit is that he kicked a rabbi to death gosh, you know he got

into an argument with him so he had a temper but no if you want to lead a rebellion against the

romans. You know that’s the kind of person you want and I think that is what most people would

have thought that’s what a messiah is supposed to do. There’s a pretty standard job description

for the messiah that you get now in the dead sea scrolls we have several brief passages and not a
whole lot of other texts actually outside of the dead sea scrolls but we have some but they’re

quite consistent. That what he should do is destroy the wicked. Now in the book of Isaiah it says

he will kill the wicked with the breath of his lips, that’s fine you know he does maybe doesn’t

need a sword but he kills them. That’s what the expectation was and then you see what happened

in the case of Jesus, really, didn’t fit that at all and that’s why they go back to the scriptures and

look say is there anything here that does fit and then Isaiah 53 seemed to be a godsend. In the

regard, the combination of that with Daniel chapter 7

PRE-CHRISTIAN MESSIANIC EXPECTATIONS

Vlogger: We’ll come to that but just the next question would be in Judaism before Christianity

was it the case that not only was there no strong obsession with the messianic expectations but in

a few places where there is a mention of a future messiah or an eschatological figure, we

encounter a diversity of views different understanding so we’ve got text you’ve already

mentioned some of them, mentioning of a Davidic messiah a priestly messiah, a prophet messiah

and even a few mentioning a divine perhaps angelic messiah figure then there’s also which you

made already. A mention of a heavenly messiah in one Enoch whose activity seems to be

confined to the heavens so can you shared some light on the diversity of pre-Christian Jewish

expectations of a future messiah or an eschatological figure and you’ve covered this some

ground already on this but there is this diversity of viewpoint I think isn’t it.

John Collins: We’ll I’d say you know if you spoke simply of the messiah anybody in first and

this would be the mashiach the anointed one. Most people would take that to refer to the king

and the expectation in that case was that somebody would restore the Davidic monarchy. Now,
this was on the books so to speak there’s the promise to David in 2 nd Samuel chapter 7 that

somebody from your line will always sit on the throne then after the Babylonian exile they didn’t

have any descendant of David and they didn’t have a king. and so, every now and then somebody

sticks in a passage in one of the prophetic books saying but the days are surely coming when

God would raise up for David a righteous branch. And then ten chapters later in Jeremiah you

read in those days and at that time, God would raise up for David a righteous branch in other

words don’t sit around waiting for it. you know I think many people would have thought of this

way many Christians now think about the second coming that its something you affirm in

principle but you don’t really expect it to happen in your life then. I think that the mess that kind

of messianic expectation generally faded into the background and you get very little of it if any

between about 500 I think. There was a little flurry when they came back to Jerusalem with the

figure of Zerubbabel. That they thought he would do it and really what they were looking for was

somebody who would restore the monarchy. not somebody who would bring history to an end

invent for a thousand years but somebody who would restore the monarchy and be get a son who

would continue it and so forth. But I think that they pretty well gave up on that and the dominant

figure in Judaism in the second temple period was the high priest. And so, when you get to the

dead sea scrolls, they talk about two messiahs. The messiah of Aaron and the messiah of Israel.

In some cases, the messiah of Aeron takes precedence and that I think was they were expecting.

When does any of these messianic expectations pick up again, I would say the two things

contributed to it. First of all, the Maccabean revolt the descendants of the Maccabees set

themselves up as a king. Now some people didn’t like that at all and especially when things went

bad and they did go bad and you had a civil war between two of the brothers and then from the

roman general came in. And around that time somebody wrote a text called the psalms of
Solomon and one of them is praying to God to raise up for us a you know a real king from

David. So it’s having a monarchy that is not Davidic is what makes some people anxious to get a

Davidic monarchy again. And then that was amplified I think when the romans took over

because then you have a foreign you know they had lived under Greeks and Persians and lived

fairly peacefully under them. But they did not live peacefully under the romans you know, that

the roman hand was too heavy so it would seem and so I think then again it doesn’t mean that

everybody was sitting around waiting for a messiah but that every now and then somebody

would come along and would excite a group of foreigners. Now we hear of a couple of people

maybe a little bit before Jesus. There was this man named Simon and another man named Throng

gaze these are only mentioned briefly in the historian Josephus but they got a following and

evidently some people got excited about Jesus. Also, and we’ll talk more I guess about that as to

why they got excited about him and but I take seriously the story of Jesus entry into Jerusalem.

You know riding on a donkey which was fulfilling a prophecy from Zechariah chapter 9 and with

people shouting hosanna to the son of David but Jesus thought of that who knows but at least a

number of his followers thought that this was it and what the romans did to the case like that is

crucify first and have your inquiry later that was settled. Now, where then do you get the idea of

heavenly messiah well what you get first of all in the book of Daniel is the idea of heavenly

patron archangel Michael quite explicitly in the later part of the book and I think that he is the

figure who is described as one like a son of man coming on the clouds of heaven. In the later

chapters of the book they’re fairly clear that there is a battle in heaven between the angel Gabriel

and Michael. On the one hand and the princess of Persia Greece and the other and so then

Michael is the one who is to win the battle. You get that also in the dead sea scrolls and the war

scroll that God will raise up the leadership of Michaels among the God of domination of Israel
among all flesh so that now these figures weren’t necessarily called messiahs the first takes that

does call you refer to Daniel 7 and that son of man and also call him a messiah is the similitudes

of Enoch and you also get it in an apocalypse called fourth Ezra at the end of the first century.

But now I think one of your questions here was you know was son of man uh a standard

expectation.

THE SON OF MAN

Vlogger: but, exactly yeah but was it was it the question was is there any evidence in any pre-

Christian text we were mentioning Daniel of course regarding a future the son of man as a title

did the son of man act as a title for a particular future figure in pre-Christian Judeos in other

words in Judea's before Christianity?

John Collins: no, it wasn't a title yeah but you could have you know the text of Daniel was

known and people could refer to it. And so in the civility of Enoch what you get is that son of

man. (right) now you know that's not quite the same thing as the son of man now you know that's

not quite the same thing as the son of man it's that son of man son of man just means human

being. you're or somebody who looks like a would be it's that son of man son of man just means

human being you're right or somebody who looks like a would be in visionary literature in fourth

Ezra they don't actually use that terminology they talk about a man riding on a cloud coming up

from the sea. but you know if you know the book of Daniel you know who they're talking about

but that this is presumably the figure foretold by Daniel but it was really the early Christians I

think who made a title out of it.

Vlogger: Right, right

John Collins: So, I think Larry Hurtado was right on that point.
Vlogger: Yes, I was I asked him the question that according to the late Larry, her to do who was

American but I think he was in Scotland for some consideration.

John Collins: That's right

Vlogger: he said there was no evidence of son of man inverted commas acting as a definitive

title for a particular figure Ecological figure and I asked if you agree with that assessment and

obviously you do. (Collins: this is interesting.) But the question is about the historical Jesus then,

if one can speak of this is, He best viewed as a claimant to be a prophetic messiah or a divine

messiah because in later Christianity he certainly was seen as a divine figure.

John Collins: Well to back up one step there was there such a thing as a prophetic messiah. well

there are a couple of cases in the Hebrew bible where prophets are said to be anointed, and you

know I think Elisha is supposed to be anointed at one point in Isaiah 61 a prophet says, therefore,

God has anointed me and you know it basically means appointed me. But the word is used and in

the dead sea scrolls they sometimes refer to the prophets as the anointed ones. Which is

interesting enough and then there is a very interesting and controversial text in the dead sea

scrolls sometimes referred to as the messiah of heaven and earth. Because it starts out heaven

and earth will obey his messiah and it goes on then to talk about raising the dead, healing the

sick, and preaching good news to the poor. And even though it's God who does it you figure God

doesn't do his own preaching. You know that's the job of herald and if you look for a messiah

whom heaven and earth obey the figures who come to mind are Elijah and Elijah. Actually,

especially Elijah and so I think you know it also in the community rule from Gurman they talk

about this will last until the coming of a prophet and the messiah severion in Israel. So they were

expecting an eschatological prophet. Meaning a prophet who would kind of bringing the change

of the world and who might or might not be called a messiah. So now when you look then at the
synoptic gospels and they think that's the evidence we have problematic as it may be for the

historical Jesus the gospel of John is doesn't sound the same let's say you know it doesn't seem

like the same idiom that Jesus is speaking. But in the synoptics Jesus is described as going

around, working miracles raising the dead, healing the sick, preaching good news to the poor and

in fact in the gospel of Luke he reads that passage from Isaiah 61 as kind of the program or for

what he's doing. In fact at one point in the gospel of Mark he says to his followers who do people

say that I am? and one of the answers is Elijah or one of the prophets.

Vlogger: yes, yes very interesting

John Collins: no why then does the tag of messiah get stuck on him, well I think it's largely

because he was going around saying the kingdom of God is at hand. now we could sit here for a

month discussing what the kingdom of God might mean, (okay) but it evidently does something

for Jesus what and I think it surely meant something different from the world as it now is you

know it's the world transformed.

Vlogger: but it's still this world though isn't it johnny we're not talking about a supernatural

heavenly realm and we're talking about.

John Collins: that's right, yes, it's talking about the transformation of this world. and now people

might hear that in different ways. and I think many people would probably have figured if you

get the kingdom of God that means you get a Davidic messiah coming back. you know that the

kingdom of God means the kingdom of Judah or entails a kingdom of Judah. and they think that

for through the people who heard Jesus say this they came to believe that well he must be the one

who is going to bring it. And Jesus himself seems to have been very evasive, you know people

scholars talk about the messianic secret, because you have just a couple of cases in the gospel
where he breaks down and tells people. You know with peter when supposedly he prophesies

how he's going to referring to himself as the son of man and how he has to go up to Jerusalem

and suffer and die and then peter says no and he says get behind me Satan. But I think it's pretty

clear from the gospels, that he did not go around saying publicly I am the messiah I am the one

you're waiting for. And so I think this is something I think maybe his followers already believe

that he was, but I think what they expected of him when he went up to Jerusalem was totally

different from what happened. And it must have been a huge shock, you know if you go into

Jerusalem saying hosanna to the son of David and you think that this man can you know perform

miracles and then no he's captured and crucified and he wasn't actually the only person that that

happened to we have a series of figures. Josephus the Jewish historian who wrote the story of the

Jewish war against Rome in the warm up so to speak to the rebellion there were several figures

who came along one of them took the crowd of people up on the mount of olives and told them

that at his word the walls of Jerusalem would fall down. Well, they didn't or the romans got there

first and somebody else told them that the Walters of the Jordan would part before him. It means

these people you know thought they were reenacting biblical scenes and I don't doubt that some

of the followers of Jesus expected that he would do something like that too. Although I don't see

any indication that he himself said then what happened was, he was arrested, crucified and

normally speaking you would expect that to be the end of the story. But then, evidently, a few

days later people started saying that they had seen him alive and the evidence really was visions,

(vision’s right) you know an empty tomb doesn't prove anything Charlie Chaplin's tomb was

found empty at one point nobody figured he wasn't. you know and the counter story then was

that somebody stole the body. which is you know what you would normally think if a tomb were

found empty but enough people claimed to have seen him experienced him and now it's very
hard you know to pronounce on the reality of something like that. I remember in my early years

teaching, a couple came along to an evening class and after class they came up to me and said

that their son had been killed in an accident and they were really upset about this and then one

evening when they were in bed he came in and stood at the foot of the bed and said it's all right.

Now what do you say if somebody tells you a story like that?

A COMMON EXPERIENCE

Vlogger: I think your point that this is actually uh in the literature is actually a surprisingly

common almost experience it's not unique at all I remember a story I read years ago the famous

English translator of the New Testament J.B Phillips which is a very readable kind of colloquial

translation wasn't very literal. Anyway he knew C.S Lewis the great Christian apologist author of

the you know the line of which in the wardrobe and all that he knew him in oxford or Cambridge

I forget which anyway C.S Lewis died J.B Phillips didn't know J.B Phillips was sitting there in

his study at oxford I think it was and C.S Lewis just sat actually appeared apparently in a chair

opposite J.B Phillips bright as day 3day there was C.S Lewis had a conversation with him now

C.S Lewis had died. I mean he was dead and now J.B Phillips is an otherwise was an otherwise

sane person I'm not parting judgment on this experience I really am not and that's not my point

is, that it happens that these kinds of things happen to grieving parents terrible story you've

mentioned. plus, two slightly more you know everyday things or a colleague has passed away it

happens. So when you have people saying well this this person Jesus of Nazareth he has such a

huge impact on our lives and you know we he's passed away and his tomb is empty. Did he go to

the right to him by the way anyway and he appears to us, yeah, I can believe that because it kind

of happens. It happens to people at oxford, it happens to people you you've met, it happens to
grieving parents, it happens I don't know why it happens I don't know if it's objectively real, it

could be, it might not be, I don't know it's above, but it happens for sure yeah I mean.

John Collins: There is some real experience underlying it. now at the same time you know it's

not the same kind of reality that we have most of the time. You know you can't necessarily call

the person back get the person to appear on demand or know what becomes of them otherwise.

But I think from the viewpoint of the people having the experience it is very real and deserves

respect.

THOMAS ACCLAMATION

Vlogger: Oh absolutely, okay, I don't want to in your marvel’s book king and messiah as son of

God. I read a fascinating comment on the apostle Thomas's acclamation in the gospel of John

20:28 where Thomas says to Jesus my Lord and my God. and in chapter eight there's a title

footnote here which I thought was really interesting you uh you were citing another scholar who

I won't mention his name but he said that, this verse where Thomas says to Jesus my lord my god

John 20:28 is the one verse in the New Testament which does unquestionably describe Christ as

God. okay now you're quite critical of that, because you go on to say this view fails to recognize,

however that the phrase dominus Edeus and presumably its Greek equivalent in the gospel of

John is an honorific acclamation used for example by those who wish to flatter Domitian the

mission (of course was the roman empire towards the end of the first century when the gospel of

John presumably was written) Now, could you elaborate on that because surely people will say

Thomas is just calling Jesus God .

John Collins: I mean God is a very equivocal term in that period now either in the Hebrew bible

there really isn't monotheism. if by that you mean the idea that only one God exists what has
happened in Christianity certainly and probably in Judaism and Islam too, is that the beings that

used to be called gods God to be downgraded and so people call them angels or demons or

whatever. But in the first century many people would still refer to them as Gods so a God is not

human although you get some humans who are also Gods including I might add the king in

ancient Israel.

Vlogger: Yeah, in Psalm 45, the Psalm 45 king is actually called God directly in an extraordinary

passage, in Isaiah 9 you get another human figure called God and Jesus quotes psalm 82 he

doesn't hear John's gospel. Shall be as Gods referring to judges of Israel so this language is used

very elastically around the place.

John Collins: So, I think you know to say my Lord and my God is like saying, my master, your

majesty, it's something like that. although I do think that chapter was written by Adela rather than

by me.

Vlogger: So you're saying that this is not to be pressed in a literal sense in in accordance with the

beliefs of later times when strict monotheism was the kind of norm everywhere. but there is

monotheism in Jewish scriptures I mean Isaiah famously you know as I have 40 armors you get

these great monotheistic statements.

John Collins: even there I would say not. I think you know he will still talk about bale and nebo

being bowed down. so I think you know the pointed issue there is who's the boss? who's the real

God? but it's not questioning that there are you know that the Gods of the other nations do exist.

they're just not any good they don't have any real power, so I think actually the idea of

monotheism really only comes in with Greek philosophy, where you begin to get the idea of the

exclusion of opposites. because you know in mythological thinking you can maintain
contradictory things, cheerfully. So, even in the uh Hellenistic Jewish literature written in Greek

a text that comes to mind is one called Pseudofocalities, it's like a wisdom text composed in the

name of the Greek poet for kilties but you know fairly transparently Jewish for all of that. and

one of the things it says is that when good people die, they become Gods in Greek. Now you

know that I think all he meant by that is what we would say they go to heaven. but you know

that's passed over to a different mode of existence from the normal human one.

DOCUMENTARY HYPHOTEHSIS

Vlogger: which is a final question if I may is a complete change of subject and coming back to

your specialism as an old testament scholar and it's an academic question so apologies to viewers

who this may not be terribly of terrible relevance but it's about the documentary hypothesis. this

is obviously the authorship of the Pentateuch/ Torah. Now the question is what is the current

scholarly consensus concerning the documentary hypothesis would it be fair to say that modern

scholars tend to agree that while the Pentateuch is the first five books of Moses so-called

probably consists of earlier multiple independent sources which were combined to give us the

Pentateuch, we cannot confidently identify these once independent sources in a scientific

manner. our modern scholars less confident these days in their ability to identify possible sources

and interpolations in the Pentateuch, what is the status of the documentary hypothesis then in

modern biblical scholarship.

John Collins: Like all great academic issues opinion is divided into at least two camps. Now if

you go to Germany and ask that question, I think almost everyone would agree that no you can't

identify you can everyone would probably grant that there is a priestly source. And the

Deuteronomy is different, although they may disagree as to whether uh you have bits of

Deuteronomy in the other books. But the old hypothesis was four sources Yahwist, Elohist
Deuteronomist and priestly writer and the Europeans by and large have now opted for what they

call in German for tribune and that is to say a kind of Roland corpus where by scribes modify

verses here and there and but it's very hard to pin down stages. against that my colleague here at

Jail Joel Baden is a staunch defender of the four for documentary hypothesis he learned that from

a man in Beluke Schwartz a Jewish scholar at Hebrew university. at Jeffrey Stackert in Chicago

is another member of the neo documentarian school and I think they make a very good case.

I think you know and you won't probably get any two scholars will agree exactly on every verse,

but I think most people have a pretty good idea of what we call the Yahwist what we call the

yellowest and you know I think some of the German scholarship is a little bit overdone. That it's

making too many fine distinctions. so I have an introductory textbook to the Hebrew bible and I

opt for the documentary hypothesis now my reason for doing that in large part is that I think it

gives you a readable text. and if you're trying to explain the text to students you've got to be able

to show some coherence in it and the German approach tends to undermine the coherence.

and people spend an awful lot of time saying this verse reflects that first it doesn't matter to

anybody.

Vlogger: it's very speculative earlier there's a strike speech. it's quite speculative something.

John Collins: so that's the state you know, I think in North America and Israel the all

documentary hypothesis is alive and well right and in Europe it's but it hasn't already expired

WRAP UP

Vlogger: it's clearly two views here um simultaneously held globally.

John Collins: I think in Britain they might be a little more inclined to go with the American

approach. You'll find exceptions to everything of course.

just inclusion you say you're just retiring well I do wish you well in your in your well-deserved

retirement. what you said before we said before we went live so to speak that I was just

remarking that you you're an Irishman originally and you've kept your Irish accent pretty much

and but you said you've been in the states about 50 years was that what you said to me?

John Collins: yes probably, a little more now I first came to the states in fall of 1969 and I

taught for one year in Dublin in 72 to 73. then I came back to the states and they've been here

since so that would be out of the last what 53 years I've spent 52 of them here I think.

Vlogger: Amazing gosh well that's extraordinary as a problem the problem the challenge I had in

introducing you looking at your uh your cv your bibliography and so on it's so vast and I can see

why you've been at it for over half a century so to speak and but anyway there's a whole

Wikipedia page folks if you want to see more of your incredible

John Collins: I never look at that stuff. No there’s nothing I look up, I look up other people but I

figure, it’s just as well not to know, you know I don’t want to know who did not say that I am,

Vlogger: no, no, no. It’s all right and everything no its very nice stuff. There’s nothing horrible

about you why would they do that I mean? Do you have any in your retirement in terms of

academic work? Are you thinking of producing any further work or is that it for the position?

John Collins: Well you know, I have a couple of unfinished projects, one of which is the

commentary and the community rule from Qumran. That a lot of that is done but I have a

collaborator on it and then who’s my student and he’s a little bit behind he is young child and his

more complicated life at this stage. And then we’re doing a new edition of apocalyptic texts in

English. Most of those will be due to come in this coming summer. And right now I had
contributed to the old one the treatment of the sibling oracles. And I’m revising now what’s open

in my desk and then I just might I did the last authored book that I had was called “What are

Biblical Values” It’s very different kind of book and what I might yet to do so is something on

the Bible in human rights. Indeed, I have a lecture on that I gave last fall and will again. Now as

a conference in a month or so and I have encouraged by a publisher to follow up on it but I need

to get the other things put to bed first.

Vlogger: Well I’m very pleased you’re continuing a very active life as I use the word retired

inverted confidence. So you’re not retired, from your teaching duties. Of course, perhaps, that’s

how it goes well. I do wish you all the very best with that and thank you very much. Indeed,

Professor John J. Collins, I’ve been absolutely fascinating hearing you speak about all these

various issues and thank you very much for your time.

John Collins: And thank you it’s been a pleasure.