“DIVINE NATURE” IN 2 PET 1,4 WITHIN ITS ESCHATOLOGICAL CONTEXT 97 the earlier point of 1 Pet 5,1 that Peter, as a “fellow elder and witness of the sufferings of Christ”, together with all of God’s people, will be a “fellow participant (κοινωνός) also of the glory about to be revealed” (cf. 1 Pet 4,13). V. 2 Peter 1,4 in Cultural Context In view of the links between 2 Pet 1,4 and the eschatological worldview of 2 Peter, θεία φύσις does not seem to be employed simply as an example of 2 Peter’s “grand style”. More to the point and in contrast to the pantheistic cultural impulses of Greco-Roman society, it also calls attention to the fact that the divine nature is not equated with, determined by, or embodied in reason and/or the in- herent laws of nature. For example, while Plutarch is often cited as offering conceptual parallels to 2 Peter 1,4, Plutarch’s essentially ra- tionalistic understanding of the deity, strong dualism, belief in rein- carnation, and agenda of self-generated moral reform provide a striking contrast to the eschatological thinking of 2 Peter. Plutarch’s hope is that a few, morally elite souls, after a gradual, protracted pe- riod of progressive self-mastery, will share in the rational nature of the deity itself 53. In 2 Peter, the “divine nature” expresses itself per- sonally, in accord with God’s own promises, which will one day be consummated at the coming of Christ. The λόγος that determines all things in 2 Peter is not nature-infused-with-reason (e.g., Plutarch, Mor. 386E; 420B), but the revealed “prophetic word” (o` profhtiko.j λόγος) concerning Christ’s return to judge the world (1,19). As a re- sult, the hope of participating in God’s eschatological rescue of his people conveyed in 2 Peter is of a completely different order than the Stoic notion of sharing in the divine nature and the afterlife, in which “a good person lives on after death, either through being re- absorbed into God’s mind or through joining the company of di- vinized heroes admitted into the Greek pantheon” 54. It is also instructive to compare 2 Pet 1,4 to Philo’s recasting of the biblical understanding of the God of Israel in the Hellenistic cat- For a discussion of the relevant texts, see STARR, Divine Nature, 122, 53 125, 128-129, 134-138, 141, who also points out that the exact phrase θεία φύσις does not appear in Plutarch’s writings. STARR, Divine Nature, 158. 54 © Gregorian Biblical Press 2012 - Tutti i diritti riservati