Comments on: I Want To Become An Anti-Gay Preacher

By: TJ

TJ — Thu, 09 Jun 2011 01:29:24 +0000

THATS EDDIE MURPHYS HOUSE

By: Ray Boltz

Ray Boltz — Sun, 26 Sep 2010 20:28:47 +0000

Sorry but I think the house that is in the picture really belongs to Eddie Murphy not Eddie Long. Check it out…http://renorealestatelogic.com/?page_id=172

By: Jack Giles

Jack Giles — Sun, 26 Sep 2010 14:24:57 +0000

The house and the property it sits on belongs to the Church, it is not Eddie’s.
That means it’s tax free, and the whole community, not just the church members are paying to support this “False” Bishop.
Send them a bill for Police and Fire Protection on the church’s 240 acre complex.

It would be icing on the cake if when he is forced to step down from his position that he be forced to live in a smaller domicile so that he has to spend time with the “fish and chips.”

By: F Young

F Young — Sun, 26 Sep 2010 11:58:36 +0000

One picture is worth a thousand words . . .

If only we had photos of the mansions, cars and yaghts of the other preachers, in the USA, but especially in Africa. I wonder how that could be done.

We might need to be satisfied with income and asset statements. Some are available in the USA, but they are not well known.

Of course, for the Prosperity preachers, this type of publicity would validate them, but it might act as a disincentive to their donors.

By: Steve

Steve — Sun, 26 Sep 2010 02:57:55 +0000

While the guilt clearly falls on this so called “holy man” who turns out to be the ultimate in hypocrisy, there is something else to consider. When I look at this house fit for a king I can’t help but wonder what in the world were the congregation members thinking? Did they really think that this “Bishop” was entitled to all this? How dumb do you have to be before you realize that someone is fleecing you? Oh, I forgot. He is a man of God, and God has rewarded him for all his good deeds. That’s right. Sorry to have even asked.

By: Ben in Oakland

Ben in Oakland — Sat, 25 Sep 2010 23:40:23 +0000

I kepep referring to him as Mr. short. I wonder why no one things it’s funny.

By: AJD

AJD — Sat, 25 Sep 2010 22:29:26 +0000

I was just reading a NY Times article about the scandal, and this sentence got my attention:

“The accusations center on the LongFellows Youth Academy, an exclusive group of teenage boys handpicked by Bishop Long for spiritual mentoring.”

“LongFellows Youth Academy” is an appropriate name, no?

By: justsearching

justsearching — Sat, 25 Sep 2010 11:19:54 +0000

I was expecting that third link to lead to a picture of Jim in a muscle tee. Talk about false advertising.

By: Maurice Lacunza

Maurice Lacunza — Fri, 24 Sep 2010 22:00:40 +0000

It seems superfluous, but after looking it up, I can see why they use the term, “categorical” to preface their position.

Dictionary.Com says: “without exceptions or conditions; absolute; unqualified and unconditional: a categorical denial.”

By: Richard Rush

Richard Rush — Fri, 24 Sep 2010 21:53:48 +0000

Priya said,

What’s the difference between a categorical denial and a regular denial? Is a categorical denial some sort of super duper denial? I’ve heard that phrase a lot over the years and it doesn’t make any sense to me.

I’ve always wondered the same thing! I hope someone will illuminate the distinction for us.