Latest / Reformed Thinking / ἀλαζών (Alazōn): When Pride Exalts Itself Against God

Transcript

ἀλαζών (Alazōn): When Pride Exalts Itself Against God · Reformed Thinking

0:00
Imagine you break your arm. You know, you go to the hospital
0:03
and the doctor puts you right in front of an X-ray machine.
0:06
Yeah, you're just sitting there waiting for the result.
0:07
Right. The image comes back and there's
0:09
just this jagged white line across the bone.
0:12
The doctor points to the screen and gives you a diagnosis.
0:15
It's either broken or it's not broken.
0:17
I mean, it's a clean binary reality.
0:19
To be black and white. It is.
0:21
You can see it, you can categorize it, and in a strange
0:24
way, it brings you a sense of comfort because it's so precise.
0:27
Well, welcome to Reformed thinking.
0:29
Our goal for this deep dive is to look at a diagnosis that is
0:33
not physical, but spiritual. Which is usually where things
0:39
get a lot less comfortable for people.
0:40
Oh, absolutely. Because when you step into the
0:42
world of ancient languages and the theological diagnostic
0:46
manuals of the early church, that clean X-ray machine just
0:50
shatters. The diagnostic landscape becomes
0:52
much more severe. Yeah, it does.
0:54
We have a massive stack of lexical sources today, you know,
0:57
including Greek dictionaries, ancient historical texts, and
1:01
theological commentaries. And we are going to unpack a
1:05
single, highly specific ancient Greek word for you today.
1:09
Just one word. Just one word.
1:12
The word is a legend, along with its related noun form alizonia.
1:17
Now, if you open up a standard English translation of the
1:20
biblical text we're looking at today, you will usually see this
1:22
word rendered simply as boaster or braggart.
1:27
Right, which is a translation that honestly severely
1:30
undersells the sheer gravity of what the ancient writers were
1:33
trying to communicate. Well, when modern people hear
1:36
the word braggart, we think of a minor social annoyance.
1:38
You know, think of the guy at the neighborhood BBQ.
1:41
Who will not stop talking about his golf handicap?
1:45
Right. Or like the person at the office
1:46
who manages to steer every single conversation back to
1:49
their recent vacation to Italy. Yeah, sure, it sounds like a
1:52
personality flaw. It just sounds like someone who
1:54
lacks a bit of self-awareness. It feels harmless.
1:56
Annoying, sure, but entirely harmless in the grand scheme of
1:59
things. But as we look at the historical
2:02
and theological sources you have synthesized for us, we see a
2:06
diagnosis of the human condition that goes far beyond just a lack
2:09
of social grace. It's.
2:10
Way deeper. Than that, right?
2:12
The central thesis drawn from these commentaries and
2:14
dictionaries is honestly striking.
2:16
The concept of the Olazen is not about someone talking too much
2:19
at a party. It is a precise diagnosis of a
2:22
creature in active rebellion against divine authority.
2:25
Wait, rebellion? Yeah, it describes someone who
2:29
is attempting to claim total sovereignty over their own life,
2:33
their own future and their own existence.
2:35
That is the core of the issue right there.
2:38
The dictionaries reveal that the Elizon is a person who
2:40
fundamentally refuses to acknowledge their status as a
2:43
created. Being they are attempting to
2:46
usurp the throne of reality basically and place themselves
2:49
upon it. That is a massive conceptual
2:51
leap. I mean, going from the annoying
2:53
guy at a party to a creature in active cosmic rebellion against
2:57
the sovereign requires some serious explanation.
3:01
It's a huge jump. But I know we cannot just jump
3:03
straight into the heavy theological conclusions.
3:06
The sources indicate that this word had a very colorful history
3:09
before it ever entered the pages of Scripture.
3:12
It really did. So to grasp the theological
3:15
weight, we need to understand the street level origins first.
3:19
Where does this word elision actually come from in the
3:21
classical Greek world? The etymological root of the
3:24
word is quite fascinating. The term alajin is derived from
3:28
the Greek word Allah, which literally translates to vagrancy
3:32
or wandering. Wandering OK.
3:34
Yeah. So originally the term was used
3:36
to describe a Vagabond. That's a descriptive noun for
3:40
someone without a permanent home.
3:41
You know somebody who drifted from place to place.
3:43
Let me stop you there, because we need to translate that
3:46
ancient reality into something a modern listener can grasp.
3:49
Today, being a wanderer or like a digital nomad is almost
3:54
romanticized. Oh totally.
3:56
People buy a van, put a Wi-Fi router on the roof, and travel
3:59
the country. It's seen as a lifestyle choice.
4:02
But I'm guessing in the ancient Mediterranean world, being a
4:04
Vagabond carried a very different social stigma.
4:07
A completely different stigma. I mean in the ancient world
4:11
society was hyper localized and built entirely on agrarian and
4:15
communal stability. People lived and died in the
4:19
exact towns where they were born.
4:20
So everybody knew everybody. Right.
4:22
Your reputation preceded you, and it outlasted you.
4:26
Everyone in your village knew your family lineage, they knew
4:28
your trade, they knew your character, and they knew your
4:31
economic standing. It's like living in a small town
4:33
today, but dialed up to 100. Yes, society functioned on a
4:36
strict social contract of trust and verification.
4:40
If you claimed you were a skilled Carpenter, the village
4:43
knew whether that was true because they could literally
4:45
look at the chairs in their own homes.
4:47
So the community itself acted as an automatic fact checking
4:51
system. You could not invent a false
4:53
persona because everyone had known you since you were a
4:55
child. Precisely.
4:56
But a Vagabond. The aloe had no local ties.
5:00
They existed completely outside that localized social contract
5:04
of trust and verification. They were off the grid
5:06
essentially. Exactly.
5:07
Well, yeah, they were a blank slate.
5:09
When a wanderer walked into to a village.
5:11
They had no references, no family to vouch for them, and no
5:15
history that the locals could verify.
5:17
Because they had no roots, they had 0 accountability to the
5:20
community. Yes, and that lack of
5:22
accountability created an opportunity for deception.
5:25
The linguistic evolution of the word is a direct result of that
5:28
sociological reality. That's just shifted meaning.
5:31
It did. The word morphed from simply
5:34
meaning wanderer into describing a false pretender, an imposter,
5:38
or a quack. Because they could just make
5:40
things up. Right, because these individuals
5:42
moved constantly from town to town, they could arrive in a new
5:46
place, make absolutely wild unsubstantiated claims about
5:49
themselves, their skills, or the where's they were selling, and
5:52
then quickly leave town before the locals realized they had
5:55
been duped. I want to make sure I am
5:57
grasping the mechanics of this deception.
5:59
Let me offer an analogy to anchor this concept for you.
6:02
This is not just someone telling a tall tale around a campfire.
6:05
No, it's way more calculated. The ancient Olazoon is the
6:08
equivalent of a modern fraudulent startup founder.
6:12
Think of a charismatic CEO who stands on a stage and makes
6:15
completely fabricated claims about a revolutionary new
6:19
medical technology just to secure hundreds of millions in
6:23
venture capital funding. Oh, that's a brilliant
6:25
comparison. They know the technology does
6:27
not exist, they know the blood testing machines do not work,
6:31
but they sell the illusion with absolute confidence, take the
6:34
investors money and hope to cash out before the reality is
6:38
discovered. They are monetizing A fabricated
6:40
reality. That is a spot on.
6:42
In modern parallel, the yellow zone is selling vaporware.
6:45
They are extracting value from a community based on a completely
6:48
artificial premise. It's a con.
6:50
It's a con. And what is compelling about
6:52
your analogy is that it highlights the psychological
6:54
element of the con. The classical Greek philosophers
6:57
actually spent a great deal of time analyzing this specific
7:00
psychological profile. Really, they categorized it.
7:03
They categorized this behavior with incredible precision.
7:06
The sources specifically mentioned Aristotle's take on
7:08
this. I imagine someone as analytical
7:11
as Aristotle had a field day dissecting the mechanics of a
7:14
con artist. He certainly did in his
7:17
Nicomachean Ethics, specifically around section 1127.
7:21
B Aristotle dissects this exact personality type.
7:25
What did he find? He notes that an alazon is
7:27
someone who claims more and better things than he has, or
7:31
even what he does not possess at all.
7:33
He defines it as a failure of truthfulness regarding 1's own
7:37
life and possessions. So they're padding their resume.
7:40
To an extreme degree, they ascribe to themselves wealth,
7:44
status, or capabilities that are entirely fictional.
7:47
They promise what they cannot perform.
7:49
I want to push back on that definition for a moment.
7:51
What if the person actually believes their own hype?
7:53
What do you mean? Like is it still Alizonia if the
7:56
startup founder genuinely delusionally thinks his
7:59
impossible software will magically work next year?
8:02
There is a difference between someone who is mentally unwell
8:04
and someone who is running a scam.
8:06
Aristotle actually addresses that distinction, which we see
8:09
cited in the Theological Dictionary as we were reviewing
8:12
today. Oh, he does.
8:13
Yeah. Aristotle argues that the core
8:15
issue is not in the person's actual ability or their power.
8:19
The defining characteristic of the alazon is their deliberate
8:22
choice to deceive. Deliberate choice.
8:24
Aristotle uses the Greek word proeresis, which refers to
8:28
deliberate choice, purpose, or moral volition.
8:31
So it is a calculated act of the will, yes.
8:35
The Alazoon has a fully functioning intellect.
8:37
They are not suffering from a delusion.
8:39
They know the objective truth about their own limitations, but
8:42
they willfully choose to project a false reality in order to gain
8:46
a social or financial advantage. The malice is in the
8:49
calculation. The malice is entirely in the
8:51
calculation. The Frastus has a perspective on
8:53
this as well. According to our stack of
8:54
sources, he wrote a famous work called Characters, which is
8:57
basically an ancient catalog of personality types and social
9:01
vices. Dear Frastus offers a definition
9:04
that is incredibly sharp. He defines alizonia as the
9:08
arousing of the expectation of certain goods which are not in
9:11
fact there. Arousing the expectation of
9:13
goods which are not in fact there.
9:14
That is a devastating definition of false advertising.
9:17
It really is. You are painting a picture of a
9:19
lavish feast, charging admission at the door, and then directing
9:23
people into a room with an empty plate.
9:25
And according to the historical notes, this specific type of
9:28
fraud became a massive trope in Greco Roman entertainment.
9:33
It did. The dictionaries point out that
9:35
the alazon became a staple character in the comedies of
9:38
Plautus. The Playwright.
9:40
Yes. Specifically, they point to the
9:41
archetype of the Miles Gloriosis, which translates to
9:44
the Swaggering Soldier. Explain how that character
9:47
functioned on the stage. Why did audiences find that
9:49
specific persona so entertaining?
9:52
The theatrical function of the comedy was to expose societal
9:55
absurdity. The swaggering soldier was a
9:57
comedic character who had strut across the stage in magnificent
10:01
armor. Looking the part.
10:02
Looking the part perfectly, he would loudly recount his
10:05
fabricated military triumphs, claiming to have defeated entire
10:09
armies single handedly and boasting of his unmatched
10:12
bravery in the face of death. But the audience knew.
10:14
Better. Exactly.
10:16
I mean, the comedy worked because of dramatic irony.
10:19
The audience knew the objective truth.
10:22
The soldier was an absolute coward who would run away at the
10:26
first sign of actual danger. The humor is located in the
10:29
massive chasm between the characters bombastic claims and
10:33
his pathetic reality. Yeah, that.
10:35
Gap is where the comedy lives, and the sources list other
10:39
professions that frequently earn this title.
10:40
In ancient literature, it was not just soldiers.
10:43
Who else the label was applied to?
10:45
Magicians, traveling orders, philosophers, doctors, and even
10:48
cooks. Cooks.
10:49
Yeah. Anyone who laid claim to a level
10:51
of intelligence, skill or status that they simply did not possess
10:54
was branded in a Lazen. So if we synthesize this
10:58
classical St. level view, we are looking at a well defined social
11:02
vice. It describes an annoying,
11:04
deceitful habit. A con artist, a braggart, a
11:07
fraud. It's all horizontal deception.
11:09
Right horizontal deception, meaning it is a person lying to
11:12
other people. But this brings us to a massive
11:14
pivot point in our sources and frankly, a mystery that needs to
11:17
be solved. OK, laid out.
11:18
How does this street level hustler, this comedic stage
11:22
character, graduate into a target of divine judgment in the
11:26
biblical texts? It's a big shift.
11:29
Because a guy lying about his military record is pathetic, but
11:33
he is not necessarily a cosmic threat.
11:36
Something must have happened to this word when it crossed the
11:38
cultural boundary into Jewish theology.
11:40
That is the pivotal shift, and to understand the mechanics of
11:43
that shift we have to look at the translation of the
11:46
Septuagint. For you listening, the
11:48
Septuagint, often referred to by the Roman numerals.
11:51
LXX is the ancient Greek translation of the Hebrew Old
11:54
Testament. It was translated by Jewish
11:56
scholars in Alexandria a few centuries before the time of
11:59
Christ. There is correct.
12:01
When these Jewish scholars took on the monumental task of
12:04
translating ancient Hebrew thought into the Greek language,
12:07
they had to find Greek words that could hold the massive
12:10
weight of Hebrew theology. Which isn't always a one to one
12:13
mapping. Yeah, it's rarely 1 to one.
12:15
They adopted this specific word Elizon, but they fundamentally
12:18
altered its trajectory in the Septuagint, particularly in the
12:22
wisdom literature and historical text like Proverbs, Job,
12:25
Habakkuk, the Wisdom of Solomon in the books of Maccabees,
12:29
Alzonia ceases to be a mere social annoyance.
12:31
It levels up. It becomes diagnostic marker of
12:34
a severely fractured relationship with the divine.
12:37
How does that linguistic mapping work?
12:38
I mean, why did they choose a word associated with St.
12:42
Hustlers to describe a fractured relationship with God?
12:45
What is the conceptual bridge? The bridge is the concept of
12:48
boundaries. In Greek thought, the word
12:51
became inextricably linked to the concept of hybris, or
12:54
hubris. Hubris meaning pride.
12:56
Yes, but a specific kind of pride in classical Greek
13:00
literature, hybris was the kind of arrogant overstepping of
13:04
boundaries that always, without fail, drew punishment from the
13:07
gods. Like Icarus flying too close to
13:09
the sun. Right.
13:10
The gods had their domain, mortals had theirs.
13:13
If a mortal forgot their place and acted like a God, Nemesis,
13:16
the goddess of retribution, would strike them down.
13:19
The Jewish writers took this Greek idea of overstepping
13:21
boundaries and applied it to the covenantal relationship with the
13:24
Creator. So they are taking the
13:26
horizontal deception, a man lying to his neighbors about his
13:30
wealth and tilting it vertically.
13:32
Tilting it vertically, yeah. It becomes a man lying to
13:34
himself and to heaven about his own status in the universe.
13:38
That is a perfect way to visualize it.
13:40
In the Wisdom of Solomon chapter 5, verse 8, the text describes
13:44
Alizonia as something that actively separates a person from
13:47
God. It separates a person from God.
13:49
It creates A relational chasm. Yes, the Theological Dictionary
13:53
by Delling highlights Habakkuk 2.5, where the Elizon is defined
13:58
as the man who refuses to put his confidence in God.
14:01
That reframing changes how I view the entire concept.
14:05
If the alazun is defined as the person who refuses to put their
14:08
confidence in God, then the opposite of the alazun isn't
14:11
necessarily a humble, quiet person.
14:13
No, it's not. The opposite is a dependent
14:15
person, a person who trusts the Creator.
14:18
The alazun trusts only the illusion they have built around
14:21
themselves. They put their confidence in
14:23
their own vaporware. To illustrate the sheer madness
14:26
of this vertical rebellion, the sources bring up a specific
14:29
historical example from the Intertestamental period to
14:31
Maccabees 9.8. This is a text detailing the
14:35
reign of Antiochus Epiphanes. OK, set the stage for us.
14:39
Who was Antiochus? He was the Hellenistic king who
14:42
brutally persecuted the Jewish people and famously desecrated
14:46
the temple in Jerusalem. The historical text explicitly
14:50
calls Antiochus and Alazoon. Why apply that specific word to
14:54
a vicious dictator? There are plenty of words for
14:56
tyrant or murderer. Because of the specific nature
14:59
of his delusion, the tag says that in his superhuman conceit,
15:03
Antiochus thought he could give orders to the waves of the sea.
15:06
Give. Orders to the waves of the sea.
15:07
That is sheer madness. Total madness.
15:10
It reminds me of the historical accounts of the Persian king
15:12
Xerxes. When his engineers built a
15:14
bridge of boats across the Hellespont, a storm came and
15:17
destroyed it. Xerxes was so enraged that he
15:20
ordered his soldiers to physically whip the ocean with
15:22
lashes and brand the water with hot irons.
15:24
That's the exact same spirit. You have a finite flesh and
15:27
blood human being standing on the shoreline yelling at the
15:30
tide. It is the ultimate picture of a
15:32
finite creature for getting its limits.
15:35
That is why the Jewish scholars toes the word alazon.
15:37
I see the connection now. The street hustler claims he has
15:41
wealth he does not possess. Antiochus claims he has a divine
15:45
nature he does not possess is an attempt to usurk the sovereign
15:49
Creator. He's claiming sovereignty over
15:51
nature. Antiochus wasn't just bragging
15:54
about his military might. He was claiming a status that
15:57
belongs exclusively to God. He believed he could weigh the
16:00
high mountains on his scales. This is the theological court of
16:04
Alizonia. In the biblical mindset, it is
16:07
the impostor who has convinced himself that he is the king of
16:11
the universe. I'm looking at the notes
16:13
regarding the book of Proverbs and I think this confirms what
16:15
we are discussing. The sources point out Proverbs
16:18
21.24, where the Alanjin is linked directly with another
16:21
specific Greek term, the authades.
16:24
The authades translates to the insolent or presumptuous person
16:27
the. Insolent person that this
16:29
connection suggests to me that the bragging, the loud talk, the
16:31
swaggering on the stage, it is all just a symptom.
16:34
Like a cough is a symptom of a cold.
16:36
Right, the boasting is the fever, but the actual infection
16:40
is a much deeper, much more dangerous presumption about
16:43
one's place in the universe. The Alazan assumes they are the
16:47
center of reality. They operate on the presumption
16:50
that they are self-sufficient, autonomous and answerable to no
16:53
one. They believe they are the author
16:56
of their own truth and the architect of their own destiny.
16:59
Having established this Old Testament context, the shift
17:02
from the street hustler to the finite creature challenging the
17:05
creator, I want to move the conversation to the New
17:08
Testament. Let's do it.
17:10
We have established the disease. Now I want to see how the
17:13
apostles diagnose it in the early church.
17:15
How does the Apostle Paul utilize this specific
17:18
terminology? Paul uses the noun form a lazun
17:22
in only two places in his letters Romans 1.30 and Second
17:25
Timothy 3.2. Only twice in the entire Pauline
17:28
corpus. Yes, just twice as a noun, but
17:30
the structural placement of the word in these two passages is
17:33
highly significant. How did you place it?
17:35
In both Romans and sect. In Timothy, Paul embeds A lazun
17:38
into highly arranged systematic lists of severe ethical
17:42
failures. These rhetorical devices are
17:45
often referred to by scholars as vice lists.
17:48
I have read about these lists. The sources mentioned they show
17:51
traces of careful, deliberate arrangements, sometimes
17:54
containing 12 or 18 distinct terms in a specific sequence.
17:58
They are not random assortments of bad behavior thrown together
18:01
haphazardly. They are carefully constructed
18:03
catalogs of human ruin. And where does our word fall in
18:06
the catalog? In both of these specific lists,
18:09
Paul places a lazun directly adjacent to two other specific
18:12
words, hyperephenose, which means the proud, and blasphemoy,
18:17
which means blasphemers. I'm looking at these lists and
18:20
I'm honestly confused. I need you to explain this
18:22
grouping because Paul groups the braggart, the guy claiming he
18:25
has a better chariot than he really does, right next to the
18:27
blasphemer. It seems extreme.
18:29
That seems like a massive overreaction.
18:31
Blasphemy is a cosmic crime. It is a direct verbal assault on
18:36
the character and majesty of God.
18:38
Boasting seems so trivial in comparison.
18:41
Why is Paul elevating a social annoyance to a capital spiritual
18:45
offense? That is the tension the
18:46
commentaries by Delling and Spic address.
18:49
We have to strip away our modern, softened definition of a
18:52
braggart. We have to forget the golf guy
18:54
at the BBQ. Right, We have to view the word
18:56
through the lens of Antiochus commanding the waves.
18:59
In the context of Romans one, Paul is describing the downward
19:02
spiral of humanity. He is charting what happens when
19:05
human beings actively suppress the truth about God.
19:08
So it's about suppression. Spick notes that these
19:11
individuals are not just vain people who think too highly of
19:13
themselves in a social setting. There are people who go to the
19:16
extreme excess of abolishing the Creator in their thoughts and in
19:20
their lives. Abolishing the Creator in their
19:22
thoughts. That is a chilling phrase.
19:25
What are the actual mechanics of abolishing God mentally?
19:28
It means you construct A worldview where God is entirely
19:32
unnecessary. The grouping with blasphemers
19:35
shows that the boast of the Alazoon is inherently
19:38
blasphemous. Because you're taking his place.
19:40
Because if you claim that you are the sole architect of your
19:43
success, if you claim you are the absolute master of your
19:47
fate, and if you believe you are the source of your own
19:49
provision, you are actively robbing God of the glory, the
19:53
credit, and the dependence he's owed by right of creation.
19:57
You are claiming divine attributes for yourself.
20:00
That is blasphemy in action, even if you never utter a single
20:04
curse word against heaven. You are stealing the sovereignty
20:07
of God and pasting it onto your own resume.
20:09
That's a great way to put it. And what about the second list
20:12
in Second Timothy 3? In Second Timothy, Paul is
20:14
giving a prophetic warning about the ethical degradation of
20:17
humanity in the last days, he writes.
20:20
For there will be people who are lovers of themselves, lovers of
20:23
money, braggarts. So it's tied to loving self.
20:26
Here, the Elysian attitude is a specific defining marker of an
20:31
inverted reality. The fundamental design of
20:34
humanity is to be lovers of God, but Paul warns of a time when
20:39
humanity becomes completely turned inward, becoming lovers
20:42
of themselves. And inward collapse.
20:44
The allergen is the ultimate expression of that injured
20:47
collapse. They love the illusion of their
20:49
own greatness more than they love the God who gave them
20:52
breath. So Paul gives us this massive
20:54
cosmic theological framework for the word.
20:57
He places it in the context of human depravity and the total
21:00
inward collapse society. But then we have the book of
21:02
James, and James, as he consistently does in his
21:05
epistle, gives us a highly relatable everyday St. level
21:08
case study of this attitude in action.
21:11
He brings the high theology down to the marketplace.
21:14
James grounds the concept in economic reality.
21:16
We see this in James chapter 4 verses 15 and 16.
21:19
Let me read the scenario drawn from our sources.
21:21
James is addressing business travelers motions operating in
21:24
the ancient Mediterranean trade routes.
21:26
These were the traveling salesman of the ancient world.
21:29
These individuals are boasting about their strategic plans.
21:32
They say today or tomorrow we will go to this or that city,
21:36
spend a year there, carry on business and make a profit.
21:40
Sounds pretty standard, right? And James looks at this business
21:43
plan this quarterly forecast and he attacks it.
21:47
He calls it Vainglory. He says it is iniquitous.
21:50
He uses the plural form of our word alizonii.
21:53
He doesn't hold back. Wait, I have to stop here and
21:55
push back on James. This just sounds like a
21:57
responsible business strategy. Any financial advisor today
22:01
would tell you to set a goal, allocate resources, project the
22:04
margin and execute. Why is James coming down so
22:08
incredibly hard on basic financial forecasting?
22:11
The lexical entries dissect the nature of this specific vice
22:15
brilliantly. James is not attacking commerce
22:17
itself. So what is he attacking?
22:20
He is attacking the theological assumption beneath the business
22:23
plan. They look at how these merchants
22:24
are described by the commentators.
22:26
They consider themselves rich in intelligence.
22:28
They pride themselves on their safe warfare, their situational
22:32
adaptability and their shrewdness.
22:34
Do you think they're the smartest guys in the room?
22:36
They do. They are proud of the importance
22:38
of their enterprise, their projected profits, and they are
22:40
multiplying fine projects for the future.
22:44
They sound like every CEO giving an earnings call.
22:46
Yeah, but James identified the theological core issue, which
22:51
the dictionaries define as ignorance of creaturely
22:54
limitations. Ignorance of churchly
22:56
limitations, meaning they have forgotten what they are.
22:58
Yes, the alazonia in this context is acting as if the
23:02
merchant holds absolute disposal over the future.
23:05
Absolute disposal. These business people are
23:07
speaking and planning with an air of complete certainty.
23:10
They're stating what they will do tomorrow and next year,
23:13
completely ignoring the fundamental reality that the
23:16
future is strictly under control of God's sovereign will.
23:19
They're leaving God out of the equation entirely.
23:21
James actually points out in verse 14 that they do not even
23:25
know what will happen tomorrow. He says their life is just a
23:28
mist that appears for a little while and then vanishes.
23:31
A mist, A vapor. That is the definition of
23:35
creaturely limitation. You cannot grasp a mist.
23:37
You cannot build a solid foundation on a vapor.
23:40
To plan for the future while actively ignoring the God who
23:44
holds the future is a form of practical atheism.
23:47
It is the imposter syndrome of the Allazoon manifesting in a
23:51
spreadsheet. They are selling themselves the
23:54
illusion of control. I think we need to bring this
23:56
right into your living room for you listening right now.
23:58
We look at these ancient merchants and judge them, but we
24:01
do the exact same thing with our technology and our wealth.
24:04
Oh, absolutely do. We use our four O 1 KS, our life
24:07
insurance policies, and our Google calendars to build a
24:10
buffer against mortality. We use these tools to convince
24:14
ourselves that we have neutralized the unknown.
24:16
We use logistics to hide our vulnerability.
24:18
Let me offer an analogy for you. The attitude James is condemning
24:22
is like being given a daily planner.
24:24
You sit down and you write out your entire life plan.
24:27
You write out your career trajectory, your financial
24:29
milestones, your five year plan and your specific retirement
24:32
date and. You fill up every page.
24:33
And you write it all in sick black permanent marker.
24:36
Then, as an afterfought, you sign God's name to the bottom of
24:40
the page and you hand it to Him, demanding that He execute your
24:44
brilliant strategy. That is the essence of
24:46
presumption. You have assumed the role of the
24:48
sovereign and relegated God to the role of an administrative
24:51
assistant. Whereas the biblical model, the
24:53
absolute opposite of Alazonia, is writing your plans in pencil
24:57
In pencil. You still plan, you still
24:59
strategize, but you humbly submit those plans to his
25:02
sovereign calendar. You recognize that he holds the
25:06
eraser, you say, as James advises, If it is is the Lord's
25:09
will, we will live and do this or that.
25:11
Spic's commentary points out that to pride oneself on one's
25:14
own abilities in this manner is, religiously speaking, a severe
25:19
sin. It's.
25:19
Not just a faux pas. It is not just a failure of
25:22
humility or a lack of manners. It is a fundamental failure to
25:25
recognize reality. The objective reality is that
25:29
you are a created being utterly dependent on the creator for
25:32
your next breath, let alone your profit margin 12 months from now
25:36
in a distant city. So claiming control over time
25:38
and money and our future schedules is a massive failure
25:41
to recognize our dependency. But the apostle John takes this
25:45
concept to its absolute chilling zenith in his first epistle.
25:49
He really does. We have moved from the stage
25:51
comedy to the business Ledger, and now John takes us to the
25:55
structure of the cosmos. First, John 2.16.
25:59
This is perhaps the most devastating use of the concept
26:02
in the entire New Testament. John unpacked the mechanics of
26:05
what he calls all that is in the world.
26:07
He's diagnosing the whole system.
26:09
He's describing the operating system of fallen humanity.
26:12
The phrase he uses is high alizonia tubu, which is usually
26:16
translated into English as the boastful pride of life.
26:19
Let us focus on a highly specific detail from the SPIC
26:22
entry regarding this verse. OK?
26:24
John gives a triad a list of three specific things that
26:28
characterize the fallen world system.
26:30
He lists the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and it
26:33
concludes with this phrase, the boastful pride of life.
26:35
OK, flesh eyes and pride of life.
26:37
Stick asks a brilliant analytical question.
26:41
Why didn't John say the lust for money or the lust for riches as
26:45
his third item? That is a great question because
26:47
greed seems to fit perfectly with the flesh and the eyes.
26:50
It is the classic trio of human temptation, sex, power and
26:55
money. Why does John break the pattern
26:57
and use this complex phrase about pride in life?
27:01
Because John has his sights set on a much more severe vice than
27:05
the ostentation of the wealthy or the arrogance of the rich
27:08
toward the poor. Greed is a sin of appetite.
27:11
Alizonia is a sin of status. So what could possibly be worse
27:16
than systemic material greed? Based on the text and the
27:19
lexicons, I would suggest that the worst possible condition is
27:22
the attitude of what the commentary calls the cosmic man,
27:25
the. Cosmic Man.
27:26
It is the delusion of absolute self-sufficiency.
27:28
I agree entirely the boastful pride of life, described as a
27:32
person who fundamentally decides and directs the course of their
27:34
entire life without taking God into account at any point.
27:38
They write him out of the script.
27:39
They. Have conceptually replaced the
27:41
Creator with themselves at the center of their personal.
27:43
Cosmos. They are the Sun and everything
27:45
else in their life, their family, their career, and even
27:47
their concept of God is just meant to or be around their
27:49
desires and plans. This attitude is the exact
27:52
opposite of the absolute duty of a created being.
27:55
Which is what? The fundamental duty of a
27:57
creature is worship. It is devout service.
28:01
It is the constant, joyful acknowledgement of dependence on
28:05
the One who sustains all things. And the Alazin refuses to do
28:08
that. The Alazin replaces worship with
28:10
self mastery. It is creaturely pride
28:12
attempting to master its own existence.
28:14
It is the ultimate imposter act. They are acting out of play
28:17
where they pretend to be God. They are.
28:19
The dictionary states that this sufficiency is something
28:22
altogether different from the classical profane alazonia.
28:25
It evolved. It evolved dramatically.
28:27
It started as a street vendor tricking a villager out of a few
28:30
coins with fake medicine, and it has metastasized into a human
28:34
soul trying to trick heaven out of its sovereignty.
28:37
So let us synthesize how far we have come on this deep dive into
28:40
these ancient sources. The word Elizun started in the
28:44
dust of the ancient Mediterranean roads.
28:46
As a wanderer. It described A Vagabond who
28:49
lacked accountability. It described a street vendor
28:52
selling fake medicine to desperate people.
28:55
It described A swaggering soldier pretending to be brave
28:59
on a wooden stage. It was a societal annoyance.
29:02
It was an imposter breaking the social trust of the community.
29:05
Right. But as the biblical writers
29:07
adopted the term, pushing it through the Septuagint and into
29:10
the New Testament epistles, they pulled back the veil on this
29:13
behavior. They exposed the root.
29:15
The Apostles reveal that the Elazon is not just a loudmouth
29:18
with a fragile ego. The New Testament reveals a
29:21
human being who is selling themselves the fake medicine of
29:25
total autonomy. Selling it to themselves.
29:27
They are an imposter whose self absorbed conceit makes them
29:30
entirely really blind to their absolute breath by breath
29:33
dependence on their creator. They abolish God in their
29:36
thoughts because recognizing the sovereign God requires admitting
29:40
their own terrifying vulnerability as a mist that
29:43
appears for a little while and then vanishes.
29:45
Wrapping up this deep dive, I want to leave you the listener
29:49
with the final thought to Mull over.
29:51
I want you to build on the tension we have tracked in these
29:54
sources and applied it to the water we swim in today.
29:57
It's highly relevant today. Think about the modern digital
29:59
economy. We live in an era, an economic
30:02
and social system that constantly, relentlessly demands
30:06
that we sell ourselves. Constantly.
30:07
We are told by every algorithm and every career counselor to
30:10
build our personal brands. We are instructed to project an
30:14
image of total competence, to curate our lives for an online
30:17
audience, and to act as the sole masters of our destiny.
30:21
The modern infrastructure of social media and self promotion
30:24
is practically built on the mechanics of alazonia.
30:27
We were incentivized to arouse the expectation of goods which
30:30
are not in fact there. Precisely if the ancient world
30:34
viewed the alazon as a dangerous imposter inviting divine
30:37
judgement, A finite creature madly yelling at the waves, how
30:41
should we evaluate the daily habits of our modern culture?
30:44
It's a sobering thought. The culture which seemingly
30:46
trains us, rewards us, and monetizes our ability to be the
30:50
very thing the apostles warned against.
30:53
It makes you wonder if our entire digital landscape is just
30:56
an endless parade of swaggering soldiers pretending we hold the
30:59
pen that writes the future while ignoring the God who holds our
31:02
next breath. Thank you for joining the
31:04
conversation today. We will talk to you next time.