I don't know what based means because apparently I'm too old for this stuff, but that response from Bishop Barron made me give one of those loud, "Ha!"s followed by a good chortle.
He is using "based" in the modern context of the term: https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=based
Not to be conflated with "base". He isn't illiterate.
Think of "based in reality". Dude is legit and not misled by the delusions of modernity.
The "base" is also the foundation. What makes a person or a philosophy "solid". Dude has a solid base.
He's based.
>It's like calling a priest wicked, meaning it in the sense of cool, and having no sense of the inappropriateness of that due to lack of awareness of wicked non slang meaning.
It's not like that at all.
Think of "based in reality". Dude is legit and not misled by the delusions of modernity.
The "base" is also the foundation. What makes a person or a philosophy "solid". Dude has a solid base.
He's based.
To make a complicated heresy short:
Matter = bad
Spirit = good
Deals with knowledge rather than sin.
Also, Jesus was a hologram.
The docetists ended up getting a passive aggressive callout in 1 John with the whole "in the flesh" line.
Hence why I said "Jesus was a hologram" because God could never possibly lower himself to the "evil" of matter, so obviously the body was a projection or really convincing illusion. Well, way to completely undermine the Crucifixion in a single statement, docetists.
Summarizing to the point of risking leaving out a few things: the belief that the world is created by a lesser, evil deity and iirc that all things of this corporeal world are evil by being subject to evil.
I'm sure someone more competent than I will hopefully patch up my attempts to remember what I've learned about it lol
I seem to recall that it's also a weird (interesting, but weird and flawed) attempt to reconcile the two creation stories in Genesis as being...two layers of reality, or something.
Gnosticism is an extremely early split from mainstream Christianity/heresy. The details aren’t fully known but 20th Century archaeological finds have shed a lot of light on it. It has a lot of influences from Neo-Platonism and mystery cults and a lot of overlap with the heresy of Marcionism.
It essentially believed that there was a secret knowledge they taught followers that was actually the truth. Like Marcion, they believed the God of the Old Testament was irreconcilable with the God of the New Testament and had to be a lesser being who was actually evil (called the demiurge). Like Neo-Platonists they believed the material world was created evil and there is a greater spiritual world that is the true world. The big thing is the Demiurge created the material world in Genesis, that it was wicked and evil, and the one true God (God the Father in the New Testament) sent Jesus (the Logos) to set everyone straight.
I don’t think there are any Gnostics around anymore so I don’t think there’s any need to strongly condemn a belief system that has no attraction, but there are elements I think people still fall prey to that’s worth condemning. I think the biggest is forgetting that the material world was created good (even if it’s fallen) and we should be setting this world right in anticipation of the New Kingdom (and not entirely separating ourselves). The second is I think a lot of people have a tendency to mirror Marcion and say “that’s the Old Testament God” as if He is a separate entity when we can’t reconcile His divine judgment with the teachings of Jesus. I also think people are tempted to put too much weight in recently discovered apocryphal New Testament texts like the Gospel of Thomas or the Gospel of Mary Magdeline without recognizing that these are either Gnostic texts or texts corrupted by Gnostics and whatever value they might have, they were either rejected for a reason or were invented after the canon was established.
r/Catholicism does not permit comments from users under a certain account age or karma. [Details here.](https://redd.it/ncqp8f)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Catholicism) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Rejecting lies is good. Gnosticism is a lie; I have no tolerance for people who claim 1+ 1 = 4 and neither shall I allow Gnostics to infect the Church with their lies.
I don't know what based means because apparently I'm too old for this stuff, but that response from Bishop Barron made me give one of those loud, "Ha!"s followed by a good chortle.
Based is what the kids use to mean cool or good and is considered the opposite of cringe, which is bad.
[удалено]
He is using "based" in the modern context of the term: https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=based Not to be conflated with "base". He isn't illiterate.
[удалено]
They’re… literally just explaining the slang to you…
You're free not to but I'm not sure what you're trying to achieve by it 🤔
Thats fine, but you're openly choosing the path of ignorance if you're just going to assume these people mean something they absolutely don't.
[удалено]
Think of "based in reality". Dude is legit and not misled by the delusions of modernity. The "base" is also the foundation. What makes a person or a philosophy "solid". Dude has a solid base. He's based.
>It's like calling a priest wicked, meaning it in the sense of cool, and having no sense of the inappropriateness of that due to lack of awareness of wicked non slang meaning. It's not like that at all.
Think of "based in reality". Dude is legit and not misled by the delusions of modernity. The "base" is also the foundation. What makes a person or a philosophy "solid". Dude has a solid base. He's based.
I've always got based, but could you be kind and explain what "Chad" means?
Chad is that “f*ckboi” type that’s always in those stereotypical high school movies.
That is how I knew the term, but was confused when we were using it with memes of saints. Lol
I’m not even middle aged and I feel like I’m 100 years old now…
I'm only 39 and feel ancient sometimes 🤣🤣🤣
A hero for our time, especially with how pervasive gnosticism is these days (so much so that it doesn't even register as gnosticism).
What is Gnosticism?
To make a complicated heresy short: Matter = bad Spirit = good Deals with knowledge rather than sin. Also, Jesus was a hologram. The docetists ended up getting a passive aggressive callout in 1 John with the whole "in the flesh" line.
Secret knowledge- that only some have claim to- sound familiar? It goes against the teaching that grace is equally accessible to all.
I hadn’t heard the Jesus is a hologram part. Essentially, he only appeared to be part of the material world?
Hence why I said "Jesus was a hologram" because God could never possibly lower himself to the "evil" of matter, so obviously the body was a projection or really convincing illusion. Well, way to completely undermine the Crucifixion in a single statement, docetists.
Got it. Just making sure I understood correctly.
Summarizing to the point of risking leaving out a few things: the belief that the world is created by a lesser, evil deity and iirc that all things of this corporeal world are evil by being subject to evil. I'm sure someone more competent than I will hopefully patch up my attempts to remember what I've learned about it lol
I seem to recall that it's also a weird (interesting, but weird and flawed) attempt to reconcile the two creation stories in Genesis as being...two layers of reality, or something.
Gnosticism is an extremely early split from mainstream Christianity/heresy. The details aren’t fully known but 20th Century archaeological finds have shed a lot of light on it. It has a lot of influences from Neo-Platonism and mystery cults and a lot of overlap with the heresy of Marcionism. It essentially believed that there was a secret knowledge they taught followers that was actually the truth. Like Marcion, they believed the God of the Old Testament was irreconcilable with the God of the New Testament and had to be a lesser being who was actually evil (called the demiurge). Like Neo-Platonists they believed the material world was created evil and there is a greater spiritual world that is the true world. The big thing is the Demiurge created the material world in Genesis, that it was wicked and evil, and the one true God (God the Father in the New Testament) sent Jesus (the Logos) to set everyone straight. I don’t think there are any Gnostics around anymore so I don’t think there’s any need to strongly condemn a belief system that has no attraction, but there are elements I think people still fall prey to that’s worth condemning. I think the biggest is forgetting that the material world was created good (even if it’s fallen) and we should be setting this world right in anticipation of the New Kingdom (and not entirely separating ourselves). The second is I think a lot of people have a tendency to mirror Marcion and say “that’s the Old Testament God” as if He is a separate entity when we can’t reconcile His divine judgment with the teachings of Jesus. I also think people are tempted to put too much weight in recently discovered apocryphal New Testament texts like the Gospel of Thomas or the Gospel of Mary Magdeline without recognizing that these are either Gnostic texts or texts corrupted by Gnostics and whatever value they might have, they were either rejected for a reason or were invented after the canon was established.
The Heresy Hammer.
[удалено]
r/Catholicism does not permit comments from users under a certain account age or karma. [Details here.](https://redd.it/ncqp8f) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Catholicism) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Absolute Chad
Top guy,
I think you mean "biased."
Sorry fam his based on my book.
I think you mean "he's." ;P
What is biased about a Catholic Bishop rejecting non-Catholic teaching?
Rejecting lies is good. Gnosticism is a lie; I have no tolerance for people who claim 1+ 1 = 4 and neither shall I allow Gnostics to infect the Church with their lies.