“DIVINE NATURE” IN 2 PET 1,4 WITHIN ITS ESCHATOLOGICAL CONTEXT 81 sion, supported by contemporary translations, that φύσις in 2 Pet 1,4 refers to a static, divine “essence”, “identity”, or ontological “being”, as if it were a synonym for οuvσi,α 4. Many commentators consequently assume that the reference to the “divine nature” connotes the quality of the divine essence as incorrupt, immortal, rational, or spiritual (i.e., non-physical). In view of v. 4c, sharing in this divine nature is there- fore a result of escaping the physical world corrupted by desire 5. This takes place either at death (cf. 2 Pet 1,12-15) or by means of cultivat- ing one’s own inherent, immortal, rational faculties as represented in the virtue-catalog that immediately follows in vv. 5-7. This ontological view of φύσις has led to three dualistic inter- pretations of the phrase θείας κοινωνοὶ φύσεως: as a reference to partaking in divine immortality, permanence, and incorruptibility as a result of escaping the transient and corrupt ex- istence of this material world, either at death or at the Parousia (a primarily dualistic reading focused exclusively on the future) 6; as a reference to participating in God’s/Christ’s immortality or in- corruptibility, either at death or at the Parousia, as well as referring to taking on God’s or Christ’s moral character now (cf. 1,3 with 1,5-7), both of which take place as a result of escaping the moral corruption of this world (an inaugurated-eschatological reading) 7; See (divinae) naturae, Vg.; “God’s kind”, The Wycliffe New Testament 4 (1388) (ed. W.R. COOPER) (London 2002), 477; “(divine) nature”, NRSV, TNIV, ESV, etc.; “die (göttliche) Natur”, Luther, Einheitsübersetzung; “nature (divine)”, La Sainte Bible; “θεία φύσις”, New Testament in Modern Greek (1939), New Testament in Today’s Greek Version (1989). See J.R. LENZ, “Deification of the Philosopher in Classical Greece”, 5 Partakers, 60, who sees 2 Pet 1,4 to be an “echo” of Platonic language and a parallel to Platonic “sentiment,” so that “philosophical paganism and Chris- tianity often meet metaphysically” (LENZ, “Deification”, 61). In addition to Käsemann, see, e.g., T.V. SMITH, Petrine Controversies 6 in Early Christianity (WUNT II.15; Tübingen 1985) 95-96 and, among the many commentaries, R.J. BAUCKHAM, Jude, 2 Peter (WBC 50; Waco, TX 1983) 181, though not as a participation in God, but “in the nature of heav- enly, immortal beings” like God, and VÖGTLE, Petrusbrief, II, 140, though not, contra Käseman and Smith, as a Rückfall into Hellenistic dualism but as an example of inculturation. See J. CALVIN, The Epistle of Paul The Apostle to the Hebrews and The 7 First and Second Epistles of St. Peter (Calvin’s New Testament Commen- taries; Grand Rapids, MI 1963) 330, T. SCHREINER, 1, 2 Peter, Jude (NAC; Nashville, TN 2003) 290, 292-294, and, most significantly, J. STARR, Sharers © Gregorian Biblical Press 2012 - Tutti i diritti riservati