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.

many gods, and rather readily speaking of human beings, especially rulers, as gods³⁰. In contact with this culture, Hellenistic Jews adopted this usage to some extent, in part reviving the similar language of the Bible³¹. Philo of Alexandria once refers to God as supreme father of gods and humans (De spec. leg. 2.165). He distinguishes between God and God’s two highest powers, the creative and the kingly³². God is most properly called the one who is (o( w!n), while the creative power is called God and the kingly power is called Lord³³. Standing between God and these two powers is the Word of God (De cher. 28; De fuga 95). In Quest. in Gen. 2.62 Philo calls the Word a second God. Depending on Exod 7,1, Philo often refers to Moses as God³⁴. At one point Philo observes that the passage does not mean that Moses actually was God (Quod det. 161-162; cf. also Quod omnis prob. 43). However, at another point he simply says that Moses was named God (De vita Mosis 1.158)³⁵.

        Even more strikingly Hellenistic Jews made abundant use of qei/oj³⁶. In view of Philo’s references to Moses as God, it is not surprising that he also calls Moses divine. For example, in Quest. in Ex. 2.29 Philo says that when Moses, the prophetic mind, becomes divinely inspired and led by God, he becomes kin to God and truly divine³⁷. Philo also speaks of the high priest as divine³⁸. Although Philo most often uses divine power as a synonym for