Some poster who adds a lot of links when he posts. And just writes a lot. No negative connotations intended from my side to you. I really just had a moment of laughter because of Peter J’s post. Maybe bacsue I have come across Steve b. Really nothing harmful intended.
So you quantify the whole Bible by the percentage of the verses . Ok then I get it. So on that basis you proved my statement was wrong when I said roughly.the point is a rebuttal to your claim
in the context of your post; “roughly” means a rough estimate:
Whole means the complete collection: 100%
IOW it seems that you are saying that the rough estimate of the Bible heard in Mass is around 100%
I am not aware of anyone else feeling that 27.5% is roughly the whole thing.
It seems that 27.5.% is roughly 30 % or maybe 25%: but not roughly the whole thing.
you feel 27.5% is roughly the whole thing.
I do not
: so I’ll drop it.
It is so hard to have a dialog when common words and phrases do not mean the same thing between posters
Well thank you.
Well, it wasn’t much of a joke tbh. Maybe just a quip even. I’m not sure whether to be flattered or puzzled that we’re still talking about it now.
shaw: :thankyou: 
I haven’t independently investigated those numbers but I trust that they are correct.
This is a very good question that needs addressing especially in light of the other posters seeming to put on the need of every book and verse in a certain time frame as being so important to the Christian faith.
Well, to be fair, I think alwayswill was responding to the claim that the Catholic Church reads the whole Bible in a 3 yr period. I’ve also heard this and was under the assumption it was true. The fact is, it is a portion of the Bible. Though I think it is realistically the heart of the Bible, starting with the majority, if not literally all of the Gospels, then the Catholic Epistles, and threst of the NT, then the major books of the Old Testament, and then maybe the less “prominant” writings of the OT. That what I’m guessing from just the amount read in Church. If one Gospel is read every week, and one other NT passage and also one reading from the OT, the amount of text in the Gospels is less than the rest of the NT, and way less than the whole OT.
Yes, I would like to know how they do that.
I think that because for many Protestants the Bible is all they have, and that is why they are so focused on things like verse knowledge, “I have read the whole Bible”, “where does it say that in the Bible”, “It does not say that in the Bible”, or like this part of the conversation when it was said that the CC roughly reads the Bible in a three year cycle, it’s like OMG not you Catholics, now I have to discredit that claim.So you quantify the whole Bible by the percentage of the verses . Ok then I get it. So on that basis you proved my statement was wrong when I said roughly.
I did not see it that way. Using percentage of the verses covered can be misleading because you are depending on which verses you picked and chose.
I would say every book of the Bible has its thrust in the message it wants to convey. If these prominent characteristics of the Book is chosen for the readings and tied together with the other books in the OT (as compared to the NT) and the psalm as prayers then the Bible can be pretty much be summarised.
Ok I get your point but I still disagree with you because that’s not my methodology of how I do it.
I think focusing too much on the verses and not the context of the whole Bible can be in danger of error in understanding them. I often heard that some Protestants used verses of the Bible to derive their doctrine but ignore some other verses that disagree with it.
btw, how long does your pastor complete the whole Bible that he teaches you in your services?
Do you all study the same passages or it is up to the selection of the pastor at any given time?
I hope you at least listen to what I said without making quick conclusion so that I don’t have to deny it.
From my experience in the RCIA process, these issues are a symptom rather than the hard objection.I grew up as a Presbyterian Protestant, lived as very devout Protestant for nearly 12 years, and still attend Protestant church services occasionally so I guess maybe I can speak on behalf of the Protestants (sort of but not really). Anyways, Protestants are very sensitive towards catholic doctrines such as the doctrine of purgatory, prayers to saints (particularly Mary), venerating saints (again, especially Mary), and all other doctrines that has to do with Mary (Marian apparitions, scapular, miraculous medals, and etc.) which makes things seems like Catholics are putting more emphasis on Mary rather than Jesus and even God himself. Protestants are fully aware about the fact that Catholics are resisting by saying that “it’s not true” but the reality speaks for itself. Most Protestants are also against making statues because apparently, it’s against the 10 commandments. Protestants are also against the Sacrament of Reconciliation (Penance) because Protestants believe that it’s nowhere in the Bible and also they believe that repentance is between us and God, not the priest in between. But on the bright side, I think Protestants are actually okay with the Pope (Bishop of Rome) and the doctrine of Transubstantiation. I personally have nothing against Catholics and I really do respect the Catholic Church and attend masses quite often (of course without receiving the Eucharist). Hope this helped you!
Thanks for the (name removed by moderator)ut.
Good post, but I think a bit of clarification is in order. For one thing, when you speak of Marian apparitions as “doctrine” , you should note that no Catholic is required to believe that apparitions at Fatima, Lourdes, etc really happened. (Although a Catholic who doesn’t believe in them might choose to keep quiet, if he or she has friends who are very big on them.) They aren’t doctrines.I grew up as a Presbyterian Protestant, lived as very devout Protestant for nearly 12 years, and still attend Protestant church services occasionally so I guess maybe I can speak on behalf of the Protestants (sort of but not really). Anyways, Protestants are very sensitive towards catholic doctrines such as the doctrine of purgatory, prayers to saints (particularly Mary), venerating saints (again, especially Mary), and all other doctrines that has to do with Mary (Marian apparitions, scapular, miraculous medals, and etc.) which makes things seems like Catholics are putting more emphasis on Mary rather than Jesus and even God himself. Protestants are fully aware about the fact that Catholics are resisting by saying that “it’s not true” but the reality speaks for itself. Most Protestants are also against making statues because apparently, it’s against the 10 commandments. Protestants are also against the Sacrament of Reconciliation (Penance) because Protestants believe that it’s nowhere in the Bible and also they believe that repentance is between us and God, not the priest in between. But on the bright side, I think Protestants are actually okay with the Pope (Bishop of Rome) and the doctrine of Transubstantiation. I personally have nothing against Catholics and I really do respect the Catholic Church and attend masses quite often (of course without receiving the Eucharist). Hope this helped you!
Hi L,
Yes. Like Satan demanded to sift Peter like wheat, because Jesus kept him the closest.
Hi g,
The passage “tax collectors and prostitutes entering” is in the context of doing God’s will. Entering the vineyard to do the will of God is paramount. One son gives lip service to the will of God without acting, the other son has no lip service but acts in God’s will. It is not a discouragement to religious practice, but rather to empty lip service in the name of religion. You see an either/or comparison here that Christ does not really make.
If religion is an obstacle to doing the will of God, why in the world did Christ come to us in the first place? It’s somewhat of a romantic myth that Christ founded a vague Gnostic sect with no religious practice or foundation, and no instituted body. Quite the contrary. He was incarnate. He was a Jew. He studied, prayed, was even baptized.
If Christ founded a Church, how can the Church he founded pose a “bigger challenge” for it’s practitioners?
Hi rc,
No worries. My apologies for taking it too much to heart. But I’ve come across the attitude that, “you’re still Catholic” far too often on here to sus out someone trying to bring some levity. But that’s on me not you.