“DIVINE NATURE” IN 2 PET 1,4 WITHIN ITS ESCHATOLOGICAL CONTEXT 91 the dominant culture of the day, often understood “nature” in a dy- namic rather than static or abstract manner (see especially its use in explicit relation to the corresponding actions of one’s nature in Rom 1,26; 2,14; 2,27; 1 Cor 11,14; Gal 2,15; Eph 2,3; see too su,mfutoj in Rom 6:5). Of special interest, therefore, is Gal 4,8, where the con- trasting, ontological meaning is clearly marked, most likely because it goes against anticipated usage. There Paul uses the verb εἰµί to speak ontologically of being enslaved “to those not being gods by nature” (τοῖς φύσει µὴ οὖσιν θεοῖς), though even in this case what disqualifies them as gods is their nature-based actions, namely, that they cannot redeem those who serve them (cf. Gal 4,4-5). Hence, without such explicit ontological language, and in view of its own context, the semi-technical reference to θείας κοινωνοὶ φύσεως in 2 Pet 1,4 is best taken not as referring to divine “being” or “essence”, or as a substitute title for God per se, but as a reference to God’s dy- namic character as expressed in the attitudes and/or actions that it brings forth or produces. As a verbal noun with an inherently indefinite referent, the spe- cific content of a being’s “nature” must therefore be unpacked by the specific attitudes and/or actions in view contextually as the expres- sion of that character. Hence, the use of θεία φύσις in 1,4 poses the question of what particular expression of God’s character is in view, which would not have been raised had one of the personal designa- tions, o` qeo,j, o` ku,rioj, or ὁ σωτήρ, employed elsewhere in 2 Peter (cf. 2 Pet 1,1-2.8), been used here. The answer lies close at hand. Contextually, the specific content of the θεία φύσις in view is clearly signaled by the twofold reference to the divine promises within 1,4 itself (τὰ … ἐπαγγέλµατα δεδώρηται, ἵνα διὰ τούτων γένησθε …), which in turn are an expression of the θεία dunamij in 1,3. The ref- , erent and rhetorical function of these promises, however, are both a matter of debate 36. Regarding their function, the most natural reading is to take the ἵνα clause of 1,4b as indicating purpose and to relate the instrumental διὰ τούτων to the most immediate possible antecedent, τὰ ἐπαγγέλµατα 37. B. REICKE’S view, The Epistles of James, Peter, and Jude (AB 37; Gar- 36 den City, NY 1964) 153, that they are the promises granted at baptism, has gained few adherents, faltering on the lack of an explicit reference to baptism in 2 Peter and on the future-focus of the promises within the letter. So too, e.g., P.H. DAVIDS, The Letters of 2 Peter and Jude (PNT; Grand 37 © Gregorian Biblical Press 2012 - Tutti i diritti riservati