James 4,1-4 in the Light of the Jewish Two Ways Tradition 3,1-6 61 topics treated by James in 1,14-15.19-20 and 4,1-4. It may be argued, then, that these verses are reminiscent of, and perhaps modelled after, a Jewish moral tradition similar to the teknon section. James lays bare the meaning of the requirements of the Law as seen through the eyes of pious Jewish Sages. b) Radicalisation Jas 4,1-4 is in agreement with contemporary Hellenistic authors and Did 3,1-6 in its emphasis on the fact that colliding selfish desires prepare the way for violence. Yet there are also essential differences. James deviates from the conventional topic by suggesting that these battles are being fought at this very same moment among the readers. In his letter it is not a potential but actual and tangible situation. Severe violence is already evident among them. The situation among his readers seems to have gotten seriously out of hand. He accuses his addressees of being engaged in wars and other conflicts (4,1-2). They are “killers” (4,2), “adulteresses” (4,4), sinners (4,8). How serious were the sins of these Christian readers? Since James argued in 2,8-11 that breaking any command amounts to violating the whole law, it follows that the “minor sins” are judged in terms of the most extreme consequences possible. James understands the various paragraphs of the teknon section in the sense that all actions which potentially lead to strife, war, murder or adultery must be seen as being as equally grave as major transgressions. He assesses the minor sins of his addressees as being major trans- gressions. His readers should not think they can plead innocence. If they allow themselves to be carried away by their passions, give in to desires and are jealous, it is the same as if they had waged war or committed murder. This radicalisation is also the setting which enables us to understand the straightforward accusation of “adultery” in 4,4. The label “adulteresses” applies not only to those who engage in the physical act of intercourse, but also to those who are covetous. They are adulterers because of their failure to resist “desire”. The choice of the specific —————— the Torah and contemporary Judaism (see, for example, B. MALINA, “Does Porneia mean Fornication?”, NT 14 [1972] 10-17). Although fornication (por- neia) is presented as a grave sin in 3,3a, it is difficult to believe that the passage’s v concern is with cultic or commercial sexual relations. It is therefore likely that the term in the first layer of this unit was adultery (moiceiva), which also occurs in the second half of the present admonition.