Terrance Callan, «The Christology of the Second Letter of Peter», Vol. 82 (2001) 253-263

The Christology of 2 Peter is very exalted. The author calls Jesus God and speaks of his divine power. He uses the title ‘Lord’ both for Jesus and for God; in the latter cases there is usually some ambiguity about which of them is meant. However, the author presents God as a person distinct from Jesus, and there is no suggestion that the author would affirm the existence of two Gods. The transfiguration revealed Jesus as the son of God. It may be understood as an epiphany of the divine Jesus. It was a moment when Jesus received glory from God, in virtue of which he is praised like God.
        2 Peter reflects a stage in early Christian thinking when the word ‘god’ was used in two ways. Usually it was a proper noun that designated the one who revealed himself in the Hebrew scriptures. Occasionally it was used as a common noun that designated those who belonged to the category of the divine. In this way 2 Peter can call Jesus God without either identifying Jesus with God or seriously affirming the existence of two Gods. Eventually these uses were related in the doctrine of the Trinity.

references to God. This is explicit in the statements, mentioned above, that God created the first heavens and earth by the word, then destroyed them through the word, and has treasured up the present heavens and earth for destruction by the same word²². It is implicit in the statement that prophets spoke from God, i.e., they spoke the word of God, and in the story of the transfiguration, when God spoke words concerning Jesus. It may even be implicit in the examples of God’s saving the pious and punishing the wicked that are cited in 2,4-8, if they are seen as examples of prophecy that point to the end of the world.

3. Jesus and God

        2 Peter sees Jesus as God, yet distinct from God. How can this be? Despite the emphasis on the word of God noted above, the author of 2 Peter does not explain the relationship between Jesus and God by saying that Jesus is the Word of God. The gospel of John first proposed this explanation, and it has been very important in subsequent Christian theology. However, 2 Peter does not seem to identify Jesus and the word of God.

        2 Peter explains the relationship between Jesus and God by saying that Jesus is the Son of God. This occurs in 1,16-18, 2 Peter’s account of the transfiguration. In v. 16 the author says that he did not make known to the readers the du/namin kai_ parousi/an of Jesus by following myths, but as a result of having been an eyewitness of Jesus’ majesty. In v. 17 he goes on to say that Jesus received timh_n kai_ do/can from God the Father and that a voice was conveyed to him from the megaloprepou=j do/chj saying, ‘This is my son, my beloved, with whom I am well pleased’.

        Jesus’ reception of timh_n kai_ do/can from God probably refers to his being transfigured, as is narrated in the accounts of the transfiguration in the synoptic gospels (Mark 9,2-8 and parallels)²³. The voice identifies Jesus as the beloved son of God the Father.

        In the Hebrew scriptures ‘son of God’ does not imply a special ontological relationship with God. ‘Son of’ is an idiom in Semitic languages that expresses a range of relationships in addition to that of biological descent. ‘Son of God’ indicates a relationship with God shared by many people, including the people of Israel as a whole, the king of Israel and the Messiah. However, in the Hellenistic world, ‘son of God’ designated divinities who were seen as literal offspring of the gods²⁴.

        Since 2 Peter regards Jesus as God, it is very likely that 2 Peter understands the phrase on Hellenistic lines. Bauckham argues persuasively that the reference to the ‘holy mountain’ in v. 18 indicates that the author sees