After just a little checking I am now making the assertion myself.
Catholic masses do have more scripture than protestant services.
So prove I’m wrong and Jim gets $750 of my money ....
AMDG
ROTFL! You managed to attend every Protestant Sunday worship service conducted this year just since yesterday?
Just the day before, you were claiming that "nearly 80% of the Old and New Testaments are read at daily Mass over a period of three years."
BWA HAHAHAHAHA. Your math is off by more than two-thirds. The actual percentage is closer to 27.5%. If you attended every single Sunday Mass in two years' time, you have only heard 3.7% of the Old Testament (932 verses). The OT reading cycle repeats itself after that, so 3.7% is the maximum. If you managed to attend every Sunday mass in three years' time (the NT reading cycle), you only heard 40.8% of the New Testament (3247 verses). With 4179 verses heard, only 12.7% of the entire Bible (excluding Psalms) is heard by the weekly-Mass-attending Catholic.
The numbers are somewhat better for the daily mass attendee, but they're nowhere near your 80%. The daily attendee hears only 13.5% of the Old Testament (3378 verses) in the two-year cycle, and 71.5% of the New Testament (5689 verses) in the three-year cycle. Add them up, and you get 9067 verses out of 33001 verses, i.e. only 27.5% of the entire Bible (excluding Psalms) is heard by a daily-Mass-attending Catholic. As long as you're checking facts, you might want to check the Lectionary again.
I would be embarrassed if I were caught believing that "nearly 80% of the Bible" was really just a quarter of the Bible. Such an admission betrays a lack of exposure and familiarity with the totality of Scripture. Have you ever read the Bible cover-to-cover for yourself, LurkingSince'98?
According to a study released in September by Baylor University’s Institute for Studies of Religion, evangelical Protestants are a whopping eight times more likely than Catholics to read the Bible on a weekly basis. Of course, the survey only looked at private Bible reading; it did not take into account the Scripture passages Catholics take in at every Mass. Still, we tip our hats to our separated brothers and sisters in Christ for their zeal for the Word of God.
-- from the National Catholic Register article Get Cracking, Catholics!, November 19-25, 2006 Issue
The Church should combat widespread "Biblical illiteracy" among the Catholic faithful, Archbishop Eterovic said.
-- from the thread Synod to Focus on Proper Use of Scripture
...this embarrassment is the presumption among many Catholics that they “get” the Bible at Mass, along with everything else they need for their spiritual lives. The postconciliar revolution in liturgy greatly expanded the readings, with a three-year cycle in the vernacular that for the first time included Old Testament passages. Given that exposure, many think they do not need anything else. As Mr. McMahon put it, “The majority still say you go to Mass, you get your ticket punched, and that’s it for the week.”
-- from the thread A Literate Church: The state of Catholic Bible study today
So prove I’m wrong and Jim gets $750 of my money ....
You are an uninformed and lazy person who makes accusations with no evidence.
Prove ME wrong and you get the SATISFACTION of showing the world I am inaccurate at least and a LIAR at best.
Your choice...
What kind of absurd assertion is that? To even say protestant services have more scripture than Catholic masses is likewise an absurd assertion, as protestant services are so varied, esp. as defined by RCs, that one is claiming omniscience by making either statement.
And which certainly will not be settled by your contest, and i am sure i find you a Prot service that contains more as well as less Scripture than a RC Mass, but which does not prove anything as regards Prot vs. Cath. services having more. And despite your denial, that was the premise behind your presumptuous challenge, and burdening Jim to example and take notes in potentially dozens of messages in a timely manner.
You need to admit that apart from offering easy money, you challenge was ill- considered. You also admit you have never been to a protestant service while your own unsubstantiated exalted idea of a Mass is already manifest in your false belief that nearly 80% of the Old and New Testaments are read at daily Mass over a period of three years." While admitting "Protestant services are mostly sermon whereas a 5 minute homily may not add even one line of scripture."
In addition, your own list of the use of Scripture includes many things that are not quotes of Scripture but merely reference it for support.
I plan to go thru them next God willing.
Here is a contest perhaps the RMs could judge, but it is not their function to do all of it:
The typical RC posts are apt to example more logical fallacies (like the oft repeated polemical basic assertion, "the Catholic Church gave you the Bible, it assuredly knows what it means"), absurd unsubstantiated or specious assertions, and commit more "personal fouls" and other rule violations than the Protestants that oppose them here, though the competition can sometimes be fierce (esp. are re the latter! protestant services ever even said that in those terms? While not as extreme as claiming omniscience by assertion there never has been a bit of anti-Prot bigotry on FR, you are not only claiming you known how much protestant services have in totality, but never clarifying what yoy mean "protestant" services
Catholic masses do have more scripture than protestant services.
So prove I’m wrong and Jim gets $750 of my money ....
Prove you're right.
All we have so far is your say so.
You checked how? When? With whom?