Chit Chat

By Ted Belman

From now on comments on every post must relate to the content of the post.

Comments that don’t relate to the post must go here.

Any person who contravenes this demand will be put on moderation. Also their offending comment will be trashed.

The reason for this demand is so that people who want to read comments which pertain to the post, don’t have to wade through the chatter.

Everyone will be happier.

April 16, 2020 | 7,908 Comments »

Leave a Reply

50 Comments / 7908 Comments

  1. honeybee says:
    December 18, 2014 at 1:04 am

    yamit82 Said:

    least I won’t have any scars
    pretty as ever.

    Loss for words!! 🙂

  2. “the word ‘scholars’ only appears in the JFJ quote ….”

    “That’s a CROCK — The word, ‘scholars,’ appears in par. 2 of the textual excerpt I quoted above. “

    “no crock, just the facts , maam…. “

    Now you’re lyingoutright . They are NOT ‘facts,’ and you know it; the word “scholars” most certainly DOES appear in the text I excerpted. I repeat the paragraph from Universal Jewish Encycl [above] — and which I showed you before — containing the word “scholars,” despite your claim that it does not appear there:

    “The New Testament cannot be understood without a knowledge of the Judaism of the times, a fact recognized by both Christian and Jewish scholars. Thus, in the case of many of the sayings of Jesus, it is possible to arrive at a more exact meaning by reconstructing the original Aramaic or Hebrew in which they were uttered. Because of the large proportion of Jewish ideas and the fact that so many Jews participated in its writing, the New Testament may be reasonably regarded as a part of Jewish literature… [p. 174]

    Here again is the basic central assertion concerning the NT’s Jewish authorship from yet another Jewish source:

    “A Jewish reader will readily note in the NT books such resemblances to Jewish tradition as are evidence that they were written by Jews or in a Jewish milieu.” Malcolm Lowe, Encyclopedia Judaica, eds Berenbaum & Skolnik, 2nd ed, Detroit: Macmilllan Reference, 2007, Keter Pblg, Vol. 15, p.191. You can find the same quote also on the Jewish Virtual Library website.

    “Jews are as much agreed as anybody else that NT was the work of 1st century Judean & Anatolian Jews.”

    “No evidence that is not filtered through christianity.

    That’s a purely circular claim, and thus thoroughly useless. By YOUR reckoning, anybody who regards the Gospel accounts as credible is ipso facto , a ‘christian’ — so your claim is meaningless.

    “I already gave you Yamits site which has a much more sensible rendition”

    ‘Sensible’??? Huff’n’puff dusts off that nerdy, sophomoric essay every chance he gets. But everything it says has been floating around forever and it proves nothing — which is why nobody has ever taken seriously a word of it.

    Celsus, on whom whom it relies, was not a contemporary of any of the players. His writing in this regard is based on a rumor he heard. He did his writing 150 years AFTER the death & resurrection of haNitzri (and his idea of Jews, btw, is that they were nothing but a bunch of escaped Egyptian slaves who should’ve been returned to their masters!).

    In any case, if you think it all hinges on whether there is external evidence to corroborate the existence of Christ, I’ll take up that matter immediately after YOU provide ME evidence of the existence of Eliyahu haNavi. (Surely that’s fair, isn’t it?)

    At least in the case of haNitzri, there are his sayings. No way they were written by a committee of Byzantine or Roman hacks. If you can’t see something very special, indeed extraordinarily brilliant, in the Sermon on the Mount, then. . . .Ah, but then, oh yes, that’s right — I’m forgetting that you’ve never bothered to examine the gospels directly for YOURSELF, have you. . . .?

    — after all, if you so much as opened the book, your ‘Jewishness’ would just wash away like facepaint on a harlequin caught in a April shower, right?

    “I prefer Jewish writings from that era, not jewish opinions from the 20th century that provide no evidence or support. the jewish writings I have read debunk the existence of JC”

    But the ‘Jewish’ writings of which you speak are NOT from that era either. It’s clear that you don’t care whether the writings are or aren’t Jewish. You simply ‘prefer’ the ones which say what you want to hear; I get it (as does ANY unprejudiced observer).

  3. “If your assertions were true [in re: Jewish authorship of NT] we would have Jewish writings from the era which supported the NT narratives claiming to be facts.”

    Not if they were suppressed or destroyed by the Jewish religious authorities of the era. (You seem to assume that only soi-disant ‘Christians’ are capable of such behavior. Human nature, however, is what it is.)

    What’s more, you overlook the fact that in the 1st century there was little Jewish religious writing of ANY sort, because of rabbinical POLICY :

    “Almost all of the books of the NT were written by Jews, many of them during one of the most eventful periods of Jewish history: just before and just after the destruction of the 2nd Temple (70 C.E.). Very few Jewish writings from that century survive, and none by the rabbis, the representatives of what soon became normative Judaism, since the rabbis of that period felt that their teachings had to remain oral (a position they eventually abandoned). So really the only surviving religious books written by Jews in the first and second centuries are a few of the later Dead Sea Scrolls and the New Testament.”

    “all the ‘facts’ are filtered through ztian sources revised for 2000 years.”

    That’s a gross exaggeration. Now, mind you: you could well have a point WRT “Xtn sources” after the Council of Nicaea [AD 325], when Constantine made Xty the state religion of the Roman Empire — because Xty had considerable power after that juncture — and I’d be much inclined to AGREE that the ‘facts’ from that post-325 period are suspect.

    However, UNTIL that time, the Jewish (religious) authorities would’ve held sway in Judea (or what was, by then, called “Syria-Palaestina”); in fact, until then, Judaism actually had a ‘legitimacy’ in the eyes of Rome as a “recognized religion” — which recognition Xty would NOT have UNTIL Nicaea. Rome’s policy was to give the locals throughout the Empire a wide berth to chart their own course religiously as long as they were not perceived as stirring up political dissension.

    Bottom line is that IF there was a religious ‘fact filter’ in Judea during the first couple of centuries after the Temple’s destruction, it was a JEWISH filter — not a ‘christian’ one.

  4. dweller Said:

    For goodness’ sake, don’t let him know you like the writing of. . . “Paul the liar

    That would be uncharitable and completely defeat the purpose of Paul’s letter.

  5. @ honeybee:

    “I love this chapter”

    “I love this letter also [1 Cor 13], I have it hanging in my closet so I might reflex on it every morning.”

    Sshh!

    For goodness’ sake, don’t let him know you like the writing of. . . “Paul the liar.”

  6. @ b-e-r-n-a-r-d-r-o-s-s:

    “I found [the text of Universal Jewish Encycl] online at a bookseller and the link to pg 174 is as follows, you will have to register as i did to see the individual pages. If you google the book you can find editions.”

    “Then why did you not quote anything more from the text than what you found on the JFJ website? If I could’ve found the text somewhere online, I WOULD have.”

    “no need to…”

    “No need to” especially if one is trying to downplay or obfuscate the central point confirmed by the excerpt you found online, and to which I referred — namely, the fact that scholarship from all quarters is broadly agreed as to the Jewish authorship of NT.

    “of course you would have as you always have verbal diahrea.”

    Pure projected nonsense. We’ve already established on multiple occasions that it’s YOU who are seriously afflicted with verbal dysentery. Your lengthy online paragraphs are enough to give even the strongest eyes a major case of eyestrain.

    “I deatl with your comment showed how you went to Jews for Jesus…”

    No; you clearly showed how YOU went to Jews for Jesus. I’d already TOLD you what I thought of them, including the nature of their main cosmological shortcoming.

    “quoting a 2oth century unsupported opinions with no evidence of historical authenticity is of no value, which is what you did.”

    “Unsupported 20th century opinions” — THAT’S your take on a reputable encyclopedia??? Material doesn’t go INTO an encyclopedia if it hasn’t been first researched, checked & re-checked. “No evidence of historical authenticity”? — authenticity of WHAT? — the encyclopedia?? (Are you playing with a full deck?)

    “I got [the quotes] from the actual 8th volume of the physical encyclopedia”

    “yes, after you realized that I had caught you”

    You ‘caught’ NOTHING (and repeating this tripe will not make it any more so than it was the first time you said it).

    I had initially given you only a cite, because that was all you ASKED for at first. You didn’t ask for a specific QUOTE — and I wasn’t about to offer one at that point, because all I had was the book, not any online version (and YOU had said at the time that you couldn’t find it online either), and I didn’t want to take the time to jam the book open while trying to type out several paragraphs of text extending to a couple of pages in the book. If I’d had an online version, it would’ve been a much simpler matter to just copy-paste the relevant text[s].

    “you ran to the actual source and posted quotes directly, but none of them supported your origninal statment”

    Didn’t have to ‘run’ to anything. Told you, the book was right there, from the get-go. I just had to type out a lot of verbiage; time-consuming pain in the arse. And the quoted text most certainly DID support my original statement, which was that scholarship is broadly agreed, irrespective of background, on the Jewish authorship of NT. Repeated here (for the 3rd time) to illustrate & confirm the point:

    “In its present form, the New Testament is written in Greek, although it is possible that some of the books were originally in Aramaic. Most of the writers of the various parts were Jews..The authors drew more or less from contemporary Jewish ideas, ethics, legends, parables, and sayings.

    “The New Testament cannot be understood without a knowledge of the Judaism of the times, a fact recognized by both Christian and Jewish scholars. Thus, in the case of many of the sayings of Jesus, it is possible to arrive at a more exact meaning by reconstructing the original Aramaic or Hebrew in which they were uttered. Because of the large proportion of Jewish ideas and the fact that so many Jews participated in its writing, the New Testament may be reasonably regarded as a part of Jewish literature… [p. 174]

    “…The New Testament was much read in the early church, restricted to the clergy during the Middle Ages, and restored to the people by the Protestant Reformation. Modern antisemitism tries to eliminate the New Testament as a Jewish literary product from the religious life of mankind with almost the same fervor as it seeks to ban the Hebrew Bible…” [p. 175]
    [Rabbi Ernst I. Jacob, in The Universal Jewish Encyclopedia, vol 8 (New York: Ktav, 1969)]

    The quotes unambiguously confirm the gist of my original statement: scholarship is undivided on the Jewish provenance of the NT.

    (Or do you really think that a gaggle of gentile hacks would’ve had a handle on the theology of the pre-rabbinical, Temple Judaism of the 1st century, despite the cultivated insularity of the Jewish people? How would they go about studying it? Maybe a few hundred yrs later, after the Bar Kokhba Revolt [AD 136]. But before that? — The very notion is nutty.)

  8. honeybee Said:

    yamit82 Said:

    How did I know that
    Gee I don’t know.

    I didn’t know it was actually hanging in your closet but I knew your were conversant with it.

  9. @ Ted Belman:
    Ted, I see you have not been reading all the posters here.
    There are some poster in this blog who have been posting very long posts daily. An insidious character who instead of dialogs keep insulting anyone who post some truth about him. He does not debate he goes on, and on, and on forever.
    Makes a nuisance out of himself and takes the time other people will have to discuss Israel and more pleasant topics than himself, answering him. Negative attention is better than NO attention at all.
    He says that he is a Christian but, is so self centered, so self absorbed that thinks only his distorted views of reality are valid. Anyone who disagree with him is likely
    to get insulted with his diatribes. The result of taking acid in his youth or something else. It is a real nuisance.
    In his crooked way of looking at the world. He thinks G-d
    died and left him in charge.

  16. You just don’t like the fact that I defended myself against a lynch mob

    — in which you have been a willing & malicious participant. Boo hoo.

    You are a sanctimonious hypocrite — and a disgrace to the conservative movement.

    Shame on you.

    http://www.thebiblechristian.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/ImaCryingBaby.jpg

    http://standfirminthefaith.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/Tissue-Cry-baby.jpg

    😛 😛 😛 😛 😛 😛 😛 😛 😛 😛 😛 😛 😛 😛 😛 😛 😛 😛 😛 😛

  17. dweller Said:

    You just don’t like the fact that I defended myself against a lynch mob

    — in which you have been a willing & malicious participant. Boo hoo.

    You are a sanctimonious hypocrite — and a disgrace to the conservative movement.

    Shame on you.

    http://www.thebiblechristian.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/ImaCryingBaby.jpg

    http://standfirminthefaith.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/Tissue-Cry-baby.jpg

    😛 😛 😛 😛 😛 😛 😛 😛 😛 😛 😛 😛 😛 😛 😛 😛 😛 😛 😛 😛

  26. @ mar55:

    “Ted, you gave us chit chat but we have been invaded by a babbling mouth who has left no space for us. He keeps going and going and going.”

    You memory is . . . selective (to put it generously). The posting record on chit chat clearly shows that my first response here was in reply to a direct attack on me. The attacks have not ceased, so my rplies have likewise persisted. If there was an ”invasion,’ it wasn’t MY doing. My conscience is clear.

    Curious, though, that you aren’t much troubled by the “babbling mouths” of the attackers who ALSO “keep going and going and going.”

    Let’s be quite clear, shall we: You don’t give a rat’s rubbers about being left ‘without space.’ There’s no lack of space here; there isn’t even a posting deadline here.

    You just don’t like the fact that I defended myself against a lynch mob

    — in which you have been a willing & malicious participant. Boo hoo.

    You are a sanctimonious hypocrite — and a disgrace to the conservative movement.

    Shame on you.

  27. @ El Señor Gran Inquisidor @ #1 [this pg]:

    “…’If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love…[etc.]’ I love this chapter but in a way and meaning you are incapable of understanding.”

    You ‘love’ that chapter? — Boychik, you know NOTHING of that chapter. In fact, in your present mindset it’s YOU who are incapable of understanding 1 Cor 13.

    Each time it uses the word translated in English as “love,” the original Greek reads agape.

    AGAPE is unemotional and non-egotistical. Nobody who worships at the altar of the ego & the ‘feelings’ can possibly have ROOM in his life for agape.

    I’ve told you several times in the past — for example — that Mr Spock was the only one in the crew of the Enterprise who had that kind of love. The producers made him “half-Vulcan” because they feared that the public might not be able to conceive of the average man as capable of his manner — but the original conception of the character was fully human. . . .

    “It’s you who stand in judgement of others,

    Nonsense. There’s not an ounce of judgment IN me; if there were, I would be emotional like you — since emotionalism lies at the core of judgment — and judgment rules your every waking moment, bubbleleh.

    I am discerning; I simply say what I think, and what I see — w/o emotionalism OR judgment. I call a spade a spade — that’s not judgment, but discernment. You just can’t stand it because it tweaks your conscience.

    ” It’s you who have no feelings…”

    That’s absurd. Of course, I have feelings — but my feelings don’t HAVE me, as yours have you — and which you try to make into some kind of virtue, when it is nothing of the sort, but a weakness (and a serious one).

    “… and are incapable of love or understanding anyone else.”

    Got your number, Jack, for sure. And as to what you call “love,” all you mean by that is whatever and whoever makes you feel good — whoever & whatever that IS, you call that ‘love.’ Yet what it consists of is egotism, pure & simple. That’s NOT even remotely like the ‘love’ Paul is speaking of in saying, “Love bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things…”

    ” You are a sick religious fanatic who hates himself and thus hates everyone else.”

    Now THERE’s as clear a case of projection as any you’ve presented us with.

    YoursTruly, OTOH, is neither sick NOR fanatical NOR — strictly speaking — even ‘religious.’

    “If you think what you think about Me, HP and others is reality?”

    Should I lie, and tell you it ISN’T what I see???

    “Then it only proves how demented and pernicious you are.”

    Oh? — how does it ‘prove’ that?

    “You have a sick soul and contaminate everyone you come into contact with like malignant virus.”

    Well, apparently ONE of us does. . . .

    “In short you are a disgusting piece of foul smelling garbage that should have been incinerated long ago. You simply foul the atmosphere with your existence.”

    Absolutely correct, mi Señor Inquisidor. I should be burned at the stake, right?

    — Will YOU be bringing the lighter fluid & the briquettes, or have you delegated that to somebody else?

  29. yamit82 Said:

    Do you get the impression he is fixated on HB????

    he is looking for escapes, diversions, after being tagged getting his info from hi Jews for Jesus site 😛
    or its that OCD kicking in again.
    yamit82 Said:

    No bones? No Fido?

    true, we need the entertainment.

  30. @ mar55:
    mar55 Said:

    Does TX likes beef also

    My Father would only eat beef occasionally fried chicken or lamb. when he was away from home for supper mom would make Tuna Fish & Noodle Casserole , a real treat. TX likes beef but will eat anything that stands still long enough to stick in a fork.

    mar55 Said:

    You always have an answer for everything.

    That’s what my Dad always said. Usually while frowning.

  31. @ yamit82:
    No one gave me a candle int his funeral but from the beginning I have tough so. He most definitely has a fixation on HB. Have no idea why.

    @ honeybee:
    Can you ever eat without BEEF? As a child my parents were afraid I do not what they were afraid but I ate a lot of beef. More than chicken and fish. Lots of fruits also. Resulting in me not liking beef now. They ate lots of beef also. Everyone in the family were beef eaters. even for the dog we used to buy fresh beef form the butcher. Does TX likes beef also?
    Thank you for the link. Very, very funny. You always have an answer for everything.

  38. dweller Said:

    Blah-blah-blah-obfuscate-blah-blah-misogynist-blah-blah-smear-blah-blah-twinkie-blah-blah-blah-blah-psychobabble-babble-babble-babble-psycho-psycho-psycho-psycho. . . . . . . . . . . . . .

    stick to this, it makes so much more sense than your usual psychobabble 🙂

  39. dweller Said:

    It’s just one more installment in an ongoing parade of games she plays as part of an elaborate balancing act to keep everybody who’s part of her world from being hostile toward her for doing the same thing with everybody ELSE who’s part of it (or ANYBODY else who’s part of it). Capisci?

    he NEVER psychobabbles 😛 😛 😛

  40. dweller Said:

    No such thing as ‘independent’ among the remaining regulars here, esp on chit chat. They’re all insecure in their “Jewishness” and rely on PresentCompany for validation & reinforcement. What’s more (and altho unbeknownst to them), YOU are every bit as Jewishly insecure as they, albeit in a different way — so YOU, in turn, rely on their RELIANCE on you.

    Toldja before (a dozen times & counting), you’re like drunks leaning on each other & holding each other up as they stumble home after last call. Along comes somebody who won’t play that game, and you all, quite predictably, act threatened by his ‘differentness.’
    Of course not. You don’t know yourselves, don’t know the viciousness of which you’re each individually capable; so how could you possibly be EXPECTED to know each other?

    But knowing or not knowing each other has no bearing on the point. The individuals comprising a lynch mob often don’t know each other either. Doesn’t keep them from leading, hosting & joining lynching parties.

    the psychobabbler must have his delusions…after all it could not be him
    😛 😛 😛

  41. dweller Said:

    And the idea that you or anybody else would try to unjustly & prejudicially CONFLATE those who wrote and lived by those writings for a full century or more (before the destruction of that Jerusalem-based movement) with the gentile perpetrators of subsequent Jewish persecution is an outrage that no honest, fair-minded person can rightly ignore.

    there is no evidence of jews living by the NT writings except filtered through christian sources. There is not even evidence of the existence of JC. the gentile perpetrators of the Jewish persecution are the same as those who followed JC. Your touting of the existence and virtues of Jesus and his disciples is a christian concoction. No honest person would take a source so prejudicial as the followers of Christianity for 2000 years and accept their assertions as having any credibility. their track record should put off any honest person. I know of no other followers of the NT or christianity or JC who are NOT the same gentile persecutors of the Jewish people for 2000 years including today. Granted there are members of the nazi party who did not themselves slaughter jews but I would not grant them one shred of credibility regarding any facts related to jews.
    dweller Said:

    All Thought Police — of any stripe — are filthy pigs.

    the thought police and filthy pigs are those touting the unsupported myths of JC and his disciples to Jews trying to deceive them into following in their footsteps. JC does not exist in Jewish writings of the era and he is obviously a fabrication. You were not led to Jesus christ through any Jewish sources and therefore you rely on christianity for your worship of jesus. Nothing to do with Jews other than the same ones who slaughtered Jews for 2000 years needed to forge a bridge to Judaism for their own authenticity. as their bridge was false they had to kill the witnesses and burn all their evidence. Mohammed did the same. These are the same folks from whom you take your info and with who you share common beliefs.

  44. dweller Said:

    a favorite conceit of yours that you rely on in hopes of discrediting your own conscience in your own mind’s eye.

    dweller Said:

    That’s just more of the above-noted conceit, a convenient vehicle for evasion of what I say.

    psychobabble
    dweller Said:

    What I told you about my teeth is fact. (Not the first time the subject has come up either.) I go in for a cleaning every 4-6 months, and that’s it (unless a crown comes loose or something like that). I get around on a bicycle (as you already knew), unless I have to travel more than 20 miles in any direction. I could tell you plenty more to illustrate the point about my being in good condition, but you’d only call it ‘bragging.’

    bragging and baloney, an old fart who needs foks to talk to.
    dweller Said:

    Of course most of THEM are women and what would they know. . . .

    finally he gets a date with a woman…..and BOASTS
    about it 😛
    dweller Said:

    Then why did you not quote anything more from the text than what you found on the JFJ website? If I could’ve found the text somewhere online, I WOULD have.

    no need to…of course you would have as you always have verbal diahrea. I deatl with your comment showed how you went to Jews for Jesus…quoting a 2oth century unsupported opinions with no evidence of historical authenticity is of no value, which is what you did. the only value therefore was to show how you went to JFJ for your arguments

    dweller Said:

    I got them from the actual 8th volume of the physical encyclopedia

    yes, after you realized that I had caught you you ran to the actual source and posted quotes directly, but none of them supported your origninal statment which was almost a verbatim rendition of the JFJ assertion. both your assertion and the JFJ were unsupported with evidence, you just wanted anything that looked Jewish… like the name Jews for Jesus from where you get your arguments.

    dweller Said:

    You’re trying to make a case out of empty air. They are both generic assertions which summarize a common finding that ANYONE would make upon reading the material I excerpted in post #34, prev pg. [repeated here, soon, just below].

    rubbish, NONE of your quotes except the first one from Jews for Jesus exhibits your exaggerated assertions. NO historical evidence given at all. If your assertions were true we would have Jewish writings from the era which supported the NT narratives claiming to be facts. all the “facts” are filtered through ztian sources revised for 2000 years.

    bernard ross Said:

    the word “scholars” only appears in the JFJ quote ….

    ..oh snap

    dweller Said:

    That’s a CROCK!

    no crock, just the facts , maam…. you lifted almost verbatim the Jews for Jesus assertion, but exaggerated it even more than them.
    dweller Said:

    Jews are as much agreed as anybody else that NT was the work of 1st century Judean & Anatolian Jews.

    No evidence that is not filtered through christianity. I already gave you Yamits site which has a much more sensible rendition than the christian version. however, you appear to prefer the christian version which asserts the existence of jesus. I know of no Jewish writings of the era which authenticate this assertion. Read Yamits site instead of Jews for Jesus. I prefer Jewish writings from that era, not jewish opinions from the 20th century that provide no evidence or support. the jewish writings I have read debunk the existence of JC and the other characters of the NT as they are portrayed in the NT, however you prefer JFJ and the NT.

  47. mar55 Said:

    Do you have a good recipe?

    Shakshuka made with canned tomatoes can be quite good, but there’s really nothing like one made of fresh summer tomatoes. The dish has such few ingredients- it relies on the tomatoes alone, and those must be of the best flavor. Try mixing different heirloom tomatoes- but any good, red, ripe tomatoes will work well.

    With slices of ciabatta or sourdough bread, this is a whole vegetarian meal on its own. I just wish I could say it was cheap, since no meat is saved. Unfortunately, if you’re living in America, tomatoes, even in the summer, can be as expensive as meat, or even more expensive- something I still cannot understand. But you’ll be comforted to know you’re following the MyPlate recommendations of the USDA, and serving your family real goodness in a skillet.

    Below are two versions for shakshuka, one is a classic tomato-paprika base with roasted eggplant, the other is a summer version of Swiss chard and fresh corn.

    Tomato, eggplant and paprika shakshuka

    My version for shakshuka includes roasted eggplant on top of the tomatoes. You can choose to make the recipe without the eggplant (but why would you?), and just skip the instructions for roasting it.

    Serves 6

    Ingredients

    1 large or 2 baby eggplants
    4 lb. fresh tomatoes, ripe (you can mix different heirloom tomatoes)
    4 tablespoons olive oil
    1 jalapeño or Serrano pepper, seeded and sliced
    2 tablespoons paprika
    6 garlic cloves, minced
    Kosher salt to taste
    6 eggs
    Bread, for serving

    Directions

    1. You have two options for roasting the eggplant. You can wrap it in aluminum foil and put on an open flame of medium-high heat for about 20 minutes, rotating the eggplant occasionally until it is soft and does not resist when you press on it. Or you can roast it in a 450 degrees oven (no need to wrap in foil) for about 40 minutes, rotating a few times. Let the eggplant cool for a few minutes, remove the skin, set the flesh in a colander until ready to use. If the eggplant contains many seeds, remove most of them.

    2. Cut the tomatoes in eight, keeping all juices. Put oil in a large pan over medium-high heat. When oil is hot add jalapeño, cook for 10 seconds, then add tomatoes all at once, let cook for 8 minutes, only shaking the pan, to get some of the tomatoes burnt a little at the bottom (nothing smells better than a slightly burnt tomato). Add paprika and garlic and mix. Reduce heat to medium-low and continue to cook until the stew has thickened, 30-40 minutes. Stir occasionally.

    3. Cut the eggplant and add to tomatoes. Add salt to taste.

    4. Gently break the eggs into the tomato stew and continue to cook to your preferred doneness. You can cover the pan while cooking to eggs to cook them faster.

    5. Divide between 6 plates. Serve with good bread to absorb and finish the tomatoes to last drop.

    Corn and Swiss chard shakshuka

    I used fresh corn, but frozen corn can work too.
    Try this shakshuka with other greens, such as spinach, arugula or kale, Or better yet, with a mixture of them all.

    Serves 6

    Ingredients

    2 tablespoons olive oil
    1 jalapeño or Serrano pepper, seeded and sliced (optional)
    1 lb. green parts only of Swiss chard (see headnote), sliced to thin strips
    3 garlic cloves, minced
    4 corn ears, kernels only (or 14 oz. frozen corn, thawed)
    ¼ teaspoon turmeric
    ¼ cup heavy cream
    Kosher salt to taste
    6 eggs
    ¼ cup cilantro leaves
    ½ cup grated Mexican queso fresco, Bulgarian feta or any mild flavored cheese

    Directions

    1. Put olive oil in a large pan over medium heat. When oil is hot add jalapeño (if using), cook for 10 seconds and add Swiss chard. Sauté, stirring as needed until Swiss chard has reduced in volume, about 3 minutes. Add garlic cloves, corn kernels and turmeric and mix. Add two tablespoons hot water, cover the pan, lower heat to medium-low and cook for 10 minutes.

    2. Add heavy cream, mix and remove from heat. Using a stick hand blender or a food processor, puree only half of the Swiss chard-corn stew. Mix with the rest of the stew and add salt to taste.

    3. Put pan back on medium heat, break eggs into the stew and cook to your preferred doneness. You may cover the pan with lid to cook the eggs faster.

    4. Divide between 6 bowls, top with chopped cilantro and grated cheese and serve.

  48. yamit82 Said:

    Best Response to your diatribes and graphically apropos!!!!

    Queeg and dweller are like siamese twins… this video says it all, the rest is window dressing, dweller keeps writing about his “strawberries”

  50. @ dweller:
    @ dweller:
    @ dweller:

    1 Corinthians 13

    If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal. And if I have prophetic powers, and understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing. If I give away all I have, and if I deliver up my body to be burned, but have not love, I gain nothing.

    Love is patient and kind; love does not envy or boast; it his not arrogant or rude. It does not insist on its own way; it is not irritable or resentful;it does not rejoice at wrongdoing, but rejoices with the truth. Love bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things,endures all things.

    Love never ends. As for prophecies, they will pass away; as for tongues, they will cease; as for knowledge, it will pass away. For we know in part and we prophesy in part, but when the perfect comes, the partial will pass away. When I was a child, I spoke like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I gave up childish ways. For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I have been fully known.

    So now faith, hope, and love abide, these three; but the greatest of these is love.

    I love this chapter but in a way and meaning you are incapable of understanding. It’s you who stand in judgement of others, It’s you who have no feelings and are incapable of love or understanding anyone else. You are a sick religious fanatic who hates himself and thus hates everyone else.

    If you think what you think about Me, HP and others is reality? Then it only proves how demented and pernicious you are. You have a sick soul and contaminate everyone you come into contact with like malignant virus.

    In short you are a disgusting piece of foul smelling garbage that should have been incinerated long ago. You simply foul the atmosphere with your existence.