Horror Show Sunday: Ritual Killings and Body Parts

ritual-gangSix people, including two pastors, were found guilty of engaging in ritual killings in a small village in Nkwerre Umugara Village in Nigeria.  The men confessed that they had kidnapped people from across the country, brought them to a forest setting and murdered them in various religious ritual killings, then sold the body parts for other religious rituals.  Some organs were sold for up to $6500 for transplant purposes.

When members of the Imo State  Rapid Response Squad Command went to the forest hideout, they found the decomposing bodies of their victims, mostly women and children.

The pastors worked for the Lord’s Chosen Church and were still actively engaged in ministry, in fact, eyewitnesses reported that they had seen one of the pastors preaching to children the day before they were arrested.

Now, at least at the moment, nobody knows for  certain why any of these people did what they did, but in Africa, as has been reported before, there’s a very real connection between the old witchcraft religions and modern-day Christianity.  Sure, the Christian missionaries have tried to stop the witchcraft, but they’ve been entirely unsuccessful.  In many parts of Africa, Christian belief and primitive religious practices have been successfully melded, just as in many parts of the Caribbean, Christianity and voodoo have been combined.  Unfortunately, as we see all too often, witchcraft rituals wind up maiming or killing people who fall on the wrong side of the rituals.

Therefore, let’s induct even more religious violence and mayhem into the Horror Show Sunday family.  When will it ever end?

35 thoughts on “Horror Show Sunday: Ritual Killings and Body Parts”

    1. What is your basis for concluding there is no hope for Africa? Seems to me that this is just the old throwing-in-the-towel attiude. Why throw in the towel? Hundreds of years ago we could have said the same thing about Europe. It went through its dark ages. Yet it emerged from those conditions. Why should you assume that there is any less hope that Africa will too eventually emerge out of whatever conditions you are using as your rational for concluding things are hopeless there? And why do you call it the Dark Continent? This name no longer has any relevance and should be abandoned. The original impetus for use of the name was because Africa was mostly unexplored and virtually unknown to 19th century Europeans; it was a mysterious continent <a href="http://(http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Why_was_africa_called_the_dark_continent?#slide=4t)” target=”_blank”>(http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Why_was_africa_called_the_dark_continent?#slide=4t). Hence the designation as dark. But this is no longer true. We know as much about Africa: its peoples, is geography, its natural history, as almost any other place on the planet. It's just silly to use this archaic term any longer given that the term is no longer useful or meaningful in describing Africa.

      1. What is my basis for concluding that?

        Simple logic.

        Just take one small fact. How do they carry things in Africa?
        On their heads.

        One would think that any advancing civilization would learn the benefits of the wheel and axle. Even in its most rudimentary form, it is called a wheelbarrow. Those people aren't even smart enough to figure it out, or its inherent benefits.

        Can you name me one textile mill, one steel mill, one foundry, one of anything in Africa, that was built and maintained by the Africans? You (nor anyone else) can't.

        Some societies are simply meant to be ruled.

      2. I'm sure some day there is hope, but not for quite some time. Not only do they have their own religious disasters to deal with, they are the current dumping ground for western religious fundamentalism and Catholicism. Africa just hasn't had the secular awakening that much of the world has yet.

        1. I agree. But they aren't likely to have this "secular awakening" if we in the western world continue to act upon the attitude that there is no hope and do nothing to assist them along in having a secular awakening. What is achieved by calling for more secularism here and abroad if we are not willing to put the resources into achieving this objective that are necessary to get the job done?

      1. Stop engaging in the No True Scotsman Fallacy. You don't get to decide who is and is not a christian. Christians have been killing people in the name of their God and their religion for more than 1500 years. What do you think the Inquisition was all about? I suppose you are going to reply that all those catholics, including the pope, who perpetrated and/or condoned these acts, were not christians? I hope you won't make any such idiotic statements.

        Also, there are passages in the New Testament that clearly reveal that Jesus Christ – assuming he even existed – was not the completely touchy-feely warm-and-fuzzy person you want us all to believe in.

        1. Christ decides. Not me. And certainly not the people abusing other humans and blaming it on a religion that stands for the opposite.

          1. Then you need to stop telling me who is and is not a christian. You are obviously not Christ, yet you essentially said these individuals were not true christians. If Christ decides then tell him to come visit me and speak the words himself to me directly who is and is not a christian. But I won't hold my breath waiting for his visit.

            Your reply is simply nonsense. You appear to be claiming a right to speak for Christ. If not then do not make accusations or claims that others are not christians. If you do then you are either claiming to be interpreting what constitutes a christian, or you have been speaking to christ directly and he told you this. If you are claiming the latter then you are experiencing delusions and may need to seek some professional help. If it is the former then your comment above is either a lie or you are an incredibly poor thinker incapable of recognizing contradictions in your own statements. Of course if there is a third possibility, let me know. I am interested in hearing what other kinds of nonsensical thoughts you can conjure up and entertain me with.

          2. Wrong. The teachings for Christians lay out that definition. My quoting that is simply laying out what the Scriptures say. You don't have to believe, but you don't get to redefine and pretend you can make up marching orders.

            My reply isn't nonsense, it's simply not what you expected. You can look up Judeo-Chrsitian and find it has a very specific definitive definition.

          3. And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written.

          4. You just thumbed down a passage from the gospels. Have a great time in hell.

          5. He seems to think he speaks for everyone and he is some christian authority figure

          6. How do you know that? Where is your evidence? You can't even prove "Christ" ever existed. Blind faith is nothing to be proud of, Roger.

          7. We've already been over this.

            Contemporary authors wrote about their experiences with him. Historians shortly after his life traveled and found nothing contradicting those contemporary authors. Why do you reject Jesus as an historical figure, even if you don't agree on His life mission?

        2. Considering there are more than 3000 distinct sects of Christianity out there, each with their own view of what constitutes a Christian, I'd be willing to bet that there are a sizeable number of sects that wouldn't consider Roger to be a Christian either.

          1. Ah, that's the hitch isn't it.

            What constitutes a Christian. The John 3:16 standard is pretty universal in all Christian groups.
            And I'd be willing to wait and ask God.

            Since you don't believe in any higher power for you to even discuss what it takes to be a Christian is all rather academic, isn't it?

          2. Why would it be more academic on that day?

            You just can't help yourself can you.
            Do you still stand by your earlier comment:

            20 minutes ago @ http://912wolverines.com/ – growl · 3 replies · 0 points
            "Having your head in a basket would make everyone here pleased.

            And we would keep your head in the basket until your girlfriend came to get you.

            It would dry up and be food for insects. The first time your head was ever used for something useful."

          3. Two years of a hotel hospitality community college is as academic as you can get.

          4. Which is why the bible has to be read literally and as you said when you read it literally is falls apart.

          5. Which is why if you want to understand it, you ask someone that does.

            I would say all mechanics are liars and then go to someone that doesn't know anything about cars to get a brake job.

          6. Well show me someone that understands it then. Because you have so mant diferent cult sects they all understand it in a different way, so the logical conclusion is that you read it literally and that throws all the bias out and you are left with a horribly written book

          7. Many do, and I've explained every time I notice you getting it wrong. Not just a bad interpretation but undeserved smears and attacks.

            It's the number one selling book, you just want to insult everyone that takes it seriously.
            (seriously is a different standard for each person of course)

            Why don't you say that same thing about the other religion that actually deserves all your harsh rhetoric?

            You ignore it unless someone drags you to it.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Optionally add an image (JPG only)