Friday, August 15, 2008

Astrology and the Watchtower Society

Three article in the Awake! magazine (1994 July 8) deride astrology and star worship. What is missing in these articles is what the Watchtower Society (WTS) used to teach.
For 62 years, 1891 to 1953, the WTS taught that God resided on the star Alcyone in the Pleiades constellation and that from this star he governed the universe!
This belief was taught in 1891 in Volume 3 of Studies in the Scriptures and was based on passages in the Bible.
The WTS also taught that the Great Pyramid of Egypt provided additional proof of God's throne in the Pleiades! (The Golden Age 1924 September 10 pp. 793-794)
The International Bible Students Souvenir Convention Report (1914) says:
The Pleiades, the center of the universe, are located in Taurus, and as though to emphasize the foundation, the original meaning of Alcyone, one of the chief stars of the Pleiades, is "foundation". How significant that thewhole universe should throughout the ages swing about that constellation and that star which alone picture so clearly the Ransom! The bullock offered on the brazen altar in the court was indeed the foundation: it represented the sacrifice of the Lord. The bullock in the sky represented the very same thing. (pp. 252-253)
The book Reconciliation (1928) says:
But the greatness in size of other stars or planets is smallwhen compared with the Pleiades in importance, because the Pleiades is the place of the eternal throne of God. (p. 14)
In 1953 the doctrine about Alcyone and Pleiades was discarded:
Some attribute striking qualities to these constellations or star groups and on the basis of such they then offer private interpretations of Job 38:31,32 that amaze their hearers...when viewed Scripturally they are completely without foundation. (The Watchtower 1953 November 15 p. 703) The Bible verses quoted in this 1953 article which were used by "Some" to "amaze their hearers" were in fact the verses used by the WTS to prove that God resided on the star Alcyone! (The Watchtower 1915 June 15 p.185; The Golden Age 1928 May 16 p. 540)
A different link of WTS doctrine with astrology appeared in the Watch Tower of 1903. There astrology and planetary positions were said to support the WTS's predictions of the "long promised era" to start by 1914. (Watchtower Reprints 1903 May 1 p. 3184)
The constellations of the Zodiac are presently considered by the WTS as being of pagan origin. (Insight on the Scriptures Volume 2 (1988) p. 1240) The same were regarded in 1914 as of Divine origin with each of the 12 Zodiacal signs having numerous correspondences with the Bible.
To my knowledge the WTS has not directly admitted their error about God's throne on the star Alcyone. Their latest history book Jehovah's Witnesses Proclaimers of God's Kingdom (1993) which they claim is "objective" and "candid" is silent on the subject.

34 comments:

Ronde said...

Why can't you post something within the last half century?

What does the writings of the Watchtower Society have to do with the governing body and Jehovah's Witnesses?

When are you actually going to post letters from the Governing body?

JoePublish said...

Q: "What does the writings of the Watchtower Society have to do with the governing body and Jehovah's Witnesses?"

A. Everything.

Ronde said...

Joepub,

Try nothing.

The governing body was not even baptized or even born when those articles were written.

Try again.

Nathan said...

Well, the teachings about God's throne in the pleiades were of course wrong. They have been changed. Where is the problem. Nobody said that JWs (well in fact this was a time before JWs) had everything right, right from the beginning. You can also tell that they celebrated Christmas, were smoking etc. All things they don't practice today. I have no problems with learning from errors.

(Btw joe, wouldn't this be a nice thread to start a pedophilia discussion? Go for it.)

A said...

Haha! When WTS teaches BS, it is just an "error". When other religions teach false, its BABYLON THE GREAT. Talk about equal standards...wake up people!

i-am-an-apostate.blogspot.com

Nathan said...

lol, as if being part of Babylon th eGreat would only mean to make errors in teachings

Anonymous said...

its not the problem of making errors (even though its kinda weired that some really bad errors were made and still made even though jesus guided the wgt).

its the problem that jws at this time NEEDED to believe this crap for not being weak and faith and maybe even disfellowshipped.

its not to disgrade todays government body. its to show the history of this religion. most jw dont know anything about it. and when the society talks about the past it always sounds like everyone was in order and there were only minor errors which was removed. no word about the big mistakes that lasted for years, destroyed lifes. no word about mistakes that repeated.

if jws can point to the other churches because of the history, why is it forbidden to point to the wtg because of their fallings?

you guessed right, because it shouldnt have happenend - it shows that the holy ghost didnt care about them and that jesus didnt chose them in 1918 as the faithful slave.

kimmy jo said...

***By their own standards*** they condemn themselves and look like part of the "world empire of false religion".
The very stuff they say about false religion they themselves are guilty.

Anonymous said...

http://www.jwfiles.com/astrology.htm

Why don't you cite where you get the information from?

According with that page:
Copyrighted:
INVESTIGATOR Magazine
P.O. Box 3243
Port Adelaide 5015
Australia

Governing Body Letters said...

There are many Jehovah's Witnesses who read this blog. I am not trying to hide the source of my information, but feel that some will not read here if the information comes from "apostate" sites.
I would appreciate your respecting my wishes.
Thank you.

Anonymous said...

... even not saying that you are not the author? Perhaps "contributed" is not the best word to state that you are not the author, but what about "external source"?

If I were the author of some information and you just copied my work without saying a word about me or even saying that you is not the author, I won't be very happy.

I respect your opinion about not to "frighten" the sensitive witnesses, but what about the authors? Are you thinking about their rights?

JoePublish said...

Ronde said: “Joepub, … The governing body was not even baptized or even born when those articles were written. Try again.”

True, the official title/arrangement of governing body wasn’t put in place until later, but the leaders of this religion (who later became the GB) did exist – they aren’t the same members as today, but they were “born” and “baptized”, I can assure you of that. Individual people, but now with a title: “Governing Body”. JW’s have always had leaders/presidents: Russell, Rutherford, Knorr, etc. previous to the GB. When they went to a Governing Body arrangement, they choose a group of men that had high seniority/loyalty in the organization. That is why so many of the original are dead – as a matter of fact, most of the original are deceased.

So, whether it’s the Governing Body or the original presidents, I can assure you that they have everything to do with what’s written in the WTS literature – as a matter of fact (I believe your associates can validate this), the VHS tapes about the organization says that they approve everything, including the picture on the cover of each magazine. And the first two presidents wrote many books themselves. To put it another way, some members of the faithful and discreet slave class have always been involved in writing these things or approving them and that is what is so shocking when people (especially JW's) read this real history (such as what is blogged here). They can’t believe what was taught. That’s why Don Cameron’s book is so compelling to read.

Captives of a Concept (by Don Cameron) tells exactly why these errors AT THAT TIME is so important. If you haven't read this book, I highly recommend it. You can obtain a PDF version on-line for only $7.00 (I do expect that one person in particular is going to be making some smart aleck/sacrastic comment about this. But let the reader use THEIR OWN discernment when reading the book/PDF.) So, if you're inclined to think, those are "old truths", read the book to find out why this logic doesn't hold water.

Ronde said...

Nathan said:"Well, the teachings about God's throne in the pleiades were of course wrong."

Says who? For all we know, he could be there.

They do not realize that if we kept things as Russell had them we would be Russellites and not be following Jesus.

Ronde said...

Dating Dufus, you are a potty mouth, or keyboard.

Ronde said...

GBLetters:
"There are many Jehovah's Witnesses who read this blog. I am not trying to hide the source of my information, but feel that some will not read here if the information comes from "apostate" sites."

It is not the information or where it is from that matters, it is that you put a spin on it and color it to say what you want,rather than the truth.

kimmy jo said...

ronde, you said:
"It is not the information or where it is from that matters, it is that you put a spin on it and color it to say what you want,rather than the truth."

That is exactly what the watchtower does, "put a spin on it and color it...rather than truth" to bad you aren't AWAKE to that basic, simple fact.

Governing Body Letters said...

"Nobody said that JWs (well in fact this was a time before JWs) had everything right, right from the beginning. You can also tell that they celebrated Christmas, were smoking etc. All things they don't practice today. I have no problems with learning from errors."
---------
If the errors making days were over, maybe these early ones could be overlooked. But the problem is that they are still making errors, still making corrections and I do not believe it will ever stop. They are making a laughing stock, a mockery of Jehovah's name. They claim that they are God's channel of communication, but they seem to be hard of hearing. The brand new book "Keep Yourselves in God's Love" in being revised at this moment.
------------
Nathan, the many fine authors of the information cited in this blog have assured me that they wrote, not for glory, but to inform the public about the corruption of the Watchtower organization. I use their information with pride and am grateful for the contributions they have made.

Ronde said...

Kimmy Jo,

your reply is quite childish.

GB Letters, why is it that no one can ever explain what the "Watchtower organization" is?

And why can't you respond when I asked where was this ban on vaccines and organ transplants?

Nathan said...

Governing body letters said:
If the errors making days were over, maybe these early ones could be overlooked. But the problem is that they are still making errors, still making corrections and I do not believe it will ever stop. They are making a laughing stock, a mockery of Jehovah's name. They claim that they are God's channel of communication, but they seem to be hard of hearing. The brand new book "Keep Yourselves in God's Love" in being revised at this moment.

------------

I think you are right. JWs will have to make adjustments to their teachings until Armageddon comes. But again I tell you, that this is no problem. They don’t claim to be infallible! Did the apostles in the first century make errors? Yes they did. Think for example what Peter did. He refused to eat with the people from the Nations when the group of circumcised arrived. Go read Galatians 2:11-14. He did this during a time when he was guided through Holy Spirit and when he belonged to the “apostles and the older men”, something like a governing body. I am interested what you would call Peter today, when you use the same words as you use for the GB of JWs. Nevertheless God trusted in Peter and he remained in his position.

Further the question of circumcision was raised again and again during the first century. And don’t forget, this was the congregation of Jesus in those days (if you believe the Bible). But still, it took a long time to settle the issue and they made a lot of errors, although being the true followers of Jesus. What would you call the first century congregation today, when you use the same words as you use when talking about JWs?

I think your argumentation does not hold.

kimmy jo said...

ronde, you said:
"It is not the information or where it is from that matters, it is that you put a spin on it and color it to say what you want,rather than the truth."
I replied:
"That is exactly what the watchtower does, "put a spin on it and color it...rather than truth" to bad you aren't AWAKE to that basic, simple fact."

"Ronde said...
Kimmy Jo,

your reply is quite childish."

So, tell me ronde, how is my reply childish ?? Or are you unable to properly respond to a true statment regarding the watchtower and their information?

Nathan said...

hey kimmy jo. the problem is that you don't stick to what was said. If someone says (like ronde did) that some other person (in this case governing body letters) is putting spin on information and tries to color it, it is not an appropriate answer just to say that in your opinion a third party (in this case JWs) is doing this as well.

This is just like a boy, who was caught by his mother when hitting another child. And then the only thing the boy has to say in defence: "but some other boy in school is hitting others too. go and blame him".

Ronde said...

Kimmy Jo, your
response was childish because it is the classic
"I know what you are but what am I"?

Respond to what is said rather than pointing the finger back around.

kimmy jo said...

ronde and nathan,
I appreciate that in your 'round about way you have admitted to the fact that the watchtower changes things to their advantage by, "putting a spin on it and color it...rather than tell truths"
GBL is using watchtower material and outside sources to explain the "misleading" teachings of the watchtower, most of the info is documented fact. Now the watchtower on the other hand....screws around with God's written word!!!!! Hmmm, something is wrong in paradise!
I am not quite sure how you can call the watchtowers history human error or mistakes. A God directed organization would not CHOOSE to use astrology, pyramids and so on and on the list goes. It is not simply ERROR as you say.
It is quite sad that you consciously recognise this, and yet remain asleep in your defense. I don't know about you but I do not want anything to do with an organization that so viemently twists bible truth.

Ronde said...

Kimmy Jo said:"ronde and nathan,
I appreciate that in your 'round about way you have admitted to the fact that the watchtower changes things to their advantage by, "putting a spin on it and color it...rather than tell truths"

Where did I say anything of the sort?

I wouldn't know of the Watchtower changes. But I don't see anything bad about anyway they put it because it does not matter. I don't worship it.


"GBL is using watchtower material and outside sources to explain the "misleading" teachings of the watchtower, "

When is he going to start? He has yet to give a 'misleading teaching'. I have asked on this days' posting 'why can't you respond when I asked where was this ban on vaccines and organ transplants?' and as Phil Collins sings, 'No Reply At All'.

"most of the info is documented fact."

But yet none of it maters.

" Now the watchtower on the other hand....screws around with God's written word!!!!! "

Really? Where?

JoePublish said...

Faithful JW’s understood organ transplants to be equal to cannibalism, thus not something for them:

Questions From Readers – w1967 11/15
● Is there any Scriptural objection to donating one’s body for use in medical research or to accepting organs for transplant from such a source?—W. L., U.S.A.
A number of issues are involved in this matter, including the propriety of organ transplants and autopsies. Quite often human emotion is the only factor considered when individuals decide these matters. It would be good, though, for Christians to consider the Scriptural principles that apply, and then make decisions in harmony with these principles so as to be pleasing to Jehovah.—Acts 24:16.

Humans were allowed by God to eat animal flesh and to sustain their human lives by taking the lives of animals, though they were not permitted to eat blood. Did this include eating human flesh, sustaining one’s life by means of the body or part of the body of another human, alive or dead? No! That would be cannibalism, a practice abhorrent to all civilized people. Jehovah clearly made a distinction between the lives of animals and the lives of humans, mankind being created in God’s image, with his qualities. (Gen. 1:27) This distinction is evident in His next words. God proceeded to show that man’s life is sacred and is not to be taken at will, as may be done with the animals to be used for food. To show disrespect for the sanctity of human life would make one liable to have his own life taken.—Gen. 9:5, 6.
When there is a diseased or defective organ, the usual way health is restored is by taking in nutrients. The body uses the food eaten to repair or heal the organ, gradually replacing the cells. When men of science conclude that this normal process will no longer work and they suggest removing the organ and replacing it directly with an organ from another human, this is simply a shortcut. Those who submit to such operations are thus living off the flesh of another human. That is cannibalistic. However, in allowing man to eat animal flesh Jehovah God did not grant permission for humans to try to perpetuate their lives by cannibalistically taking into their bodies human flesh, whether chewed or in the form of whole organs or body parts taken from others.

What should be done, though, when a Christian is asked to provide an organ for use in another person or to allow the body part of a deceased loved one to be so used? We might ask, If a Christian decided personally that he would not sustain his own life with the flesh of another imperfect human, could he conscientiously allow part of his flesh to be used in that way to sustain someone else?
….
It should be evident from this discussion that Christians who have been enlightened by God’s Word do not need to make these decisions simply on the basis of personal whim or emotion. They can consider the divine principles recorded in the Scriptures and use these in making personal decisions as they look to God for direction, trusting him and putting their confidence in the future that he has in store for those who love him.—Prov. 3:5, 6; Ps. 119:105.

Ronde said...

JoePub,

I asked for the text that banned organ transplants and you quote the 11/15/1967W. Since Fred Franz was not the head of the congregation, Jesus is, that is not a ban.

Where in that is a ban?

"However, in allowing man to eat animal flesh Jehovah God did not grant permission for humans "

Just because Jehovah did not give permission does not make it a ban, there are many things that humans do that Jehovah did not give permission for. They drive, they smoke, etc.

Note that it concludes: "They can consider the divine principles recorded in the Scriptures and use these in making personal decisions as they look to God for direction, trusting him and putting their confidence in the future that he has in store for those who love him"

Thus it is a personal decision.

So try again. There was never a ban on organ transplants. If there were, there would be be restatements of it and there would be assembly talks restating it. There have not been.

JoePublish said...

Just because you're a maverick in JW's organization, it doesn't mean faithful JW's feel the same way you do. The faithful ones adhere to the directives in the Watchtower - if you don't know that, it's time for a reality check.

Noticed how they (the GB) changed their tune and how they try to ignore the fact that they (the leaders) started this whole cannibalism idea to begin with (but try to sidestep that point with clever writing techniques).

This article shows some nifty waffling on this matter, all intended to set up a “smoke-screen” to divert readers from their original stance of NO ORGAN TRANSPLANTS. (They are experts at diversion btw.)

Of utmost importance is the “last sentence” which proves that individuals would be disfellowshipped from the congregation for receiving an organ transplant, for why else would it be necesssary to state this in lieu of a changed position? (btw: Ronde, if you would do a little research and ask the faithful old-timers how they understood organ transplants, you would do yourself a favor. They viewed it as God’s directive – through the faithful and discreet slave – to NOT take organ transplants. That’s the message they heard, at the time.)

Watchtower 1980 3/15

Questions From Readers
● Should congregation action be taken if a baptized Christian accepts a human organ transplant, such as of a cornea or a kidney?

Regarding the transplantation of human tissue or bone from one human to another, this is a matter for conscientious decision by each one of Jehovah’s Witnesses. Some Christians might feel that taking into their bodies any tissue or body part from another human is cannibalistic. They might hold that the transplanted human material is intended to become part of the recipient’s body to keep him alive and functioning.

They might not see it as fundamentally different from consuming flesh through the mouth. Such feelings may arise from considering that God did not make specific provision for man to eat the flesh of his fellowman when he made provision for humans to eat the flesh of animals that had been drained of their life-sustaining blood. They may give consideration also to the way people in Bible times viewed sustaining themselves by taking in human flesh. For example, see the account at 2 Kings 6:24-30; Deuteronomy 28:53-57; Lamentations 2:20 and 4:10. At John 6:48-66, Jesus spoke figuratively of eating his flesh and drinking his blood. On hearing this discussion and not perceiving the spiritual significance of his words, some of his Jewish disciples were shocked and turned from following him. These accounts illustrate how some humans felt about eating human flesh.

Other sincere Christians today may feel that the Bible does not definitely rule out medical transplants of human organs. They may reason that in some cases the human material is not expected to become a permanent part of the recipient’s body. Body cells are said to be replaced about every seven years, and this would be true of any human body parts that would be transplanted. It may be argued, too, that organ transplants are different from cannibalism since the “donor” is not killed to supply food. In some cases persons nearing death actually have willed body parts to be used for transplants. Of course, if a transplant should require taking in another person’s blood, undeniably that would be contrary to God’s command.—Acts 15:19, 20.

Clearly, personal views and conscientious feelings vary on this issue of transplantation. It is well known that the use of human materials for human consumption varies all the way from minor items, such as hormones and corneas, to major organs, such as kidneys and hearts. While the Bible specifically forbids consuming blood, there is no Biblical command pointedly forbidding the taking in of other human tissue. For this reason, each individual faced with making a decision on this matter should carefully and prayerfully weigh matters and then decide conscientiously what he or she could or could not do before God. It is a matter for personal decision. (Gal. 6:5) The congregation judicial committee would not take disciplinary action if someone accepted an organ transplant.

(Again, notice how different these articles read. Faithful JW's understood the first article to mean no organ transplants "if" you want to please Jehovah God.)

Ronde said...

Joepub said

"Just because you're a maverick in JW's organization, it doesn't mean faithful JW's feel the same way you do. The faithful ones adhere to the directives in the Watchtower - if you don't know that, it's time for a reality check."

I'm not a maverick, I don't even look like James Garner. Mel Gibson...


I am a faithful JW. The Bible says that the apostles are not masters of our faith, since the apostles are not, the governing body is not either. Faithful ones adhere to that.


"Noticed how they (the GB) changed their tune and how they try to ignore the fact that they (the leaders) started this whole cannibalism idea to begin with"

Well, it was not the GB that stated that, it was Fred Franz. As the VP,what he wrote got printed.

"This article shows some nifty waffling on this matter, all intended to set up a “smoke-screen” to divert readers from their original stance of NO ORGAN TRANSPLANTS."

Well, how would anyone know whether another got a transplant anyway?

", if you would do a little research and ask the faithful old-timers how they understood organ transplants, you would do yourself a favor. They viewed it as God’s directive – through the faithful and discreet slave – to NOT take organ transplants. That’s the message they heard, at the time.)"

I am not interested in the wrong opinions of people, yourself included. As I stated, it was not taught at the assemblies, then it was not a teaching of Jehovah's Witnesses.

And why is it that no one has ever been disfellowshipped for that? Names anyone?

"he congregation judicial committee would not take disciplinary action if someone accepted an organ transplant."

Well there were some militant judical committees and that may have prompted that question.

But the fact is that organ transplants were dangerous. And until 1983 when the drug that prohibits rejection was approved, many transplants failed. Thus that first WT article helped people stay away from something dangerous and the second stated that things were safer now.

But it was never a religious issue.

JoePublish said...

"But it was never a religious issue."

Are you just trying to be stupid. Did you see all those scriptures surrounding their statements? You better believe it was a religious issue.

Boy, there's no hope for you Ronde... none. Have a nice life (more sarcasm Nathan).

It's so interesting how you and Nathan are only interested in arguing. Why... if I say it's 'white', you two will say, 'no, it's really an off-white, with a tint of yellow' - totally ignoring the point made by use of "diversion".

I see right through you two. You're like the Emperor with no clothes (who only thinks he's wearing clothes).

You both ought to re-think why the GB doesn't try to defend themselves on the Internet. They would get buried with the "documented truths" of their hypocritical ways - there are so many of these documents on the Internet for ALL TO READ. And, boy they just hate that, just like you two. Like father, like son.

Ronde said...

Joepub:

""But it was never a religious issue."

Are you just trying to be stupid. Did you see all those scriptures surrounding their statements? You better believe it was a religious issue."

Just because writers of a magazine use scriptures that they believe apply, does not make it a religious issue. It makes it one to them, but not to anyone else.

You are the ones worshipping the watchtower, so it is to you.

JoePublish said...

Hmmm, makes me wonder why you go to the weekly Watchtower studies since you don't look at the studies as "relgious/religion". What would you call it then?

On the one hand I feel bad for you, but then again, you deserve all of this fine logic being thrown your way... you just may come to your senses one day.

Have a good one Ronde. I've been hard on you lately, but I know how the mind works... you'll get it one of these days.

Ronde said...

Joepub muttered unintelligibly

"Hmmm, makes me wonder why you go to the weekly Watchtower studies since you don't look at the studies as "relgious/religion". What would you call it then?"

What the heck you talking about dude?

Ethan Reid said...

Where did the organization come from though ? These men are a representation of the governing body before then they still do many of the same things these early people did within the religion. Your comment has absolutely no significance or meaning in it. being baptized means nothing of getting saved or not.
Try again

Ethan Reid said...

The JW's to this day and many many times after their early publications have been false,changed, deleted, changed, edited etc. at the end of the day we're all human and we all make mistakes. The problems arise when and organization (word not ever found in the Bible nor is governing body) claim to be directed and appointed by jehova himself and guided by the Holy Spirit and then turn right around and come out with false prophecies, change doctorine while still claim this guideance of the Holy Spirit. That would insinuate both Jesus and jehova are playing games with its people or they are a lie themselves. It clearly states from the earliest of times God word is truth and never changing. How do you determine what is false and what is true. Just think of this: in biblical times the word was written by imperfect humans (the prophets) yet we can all agree the word of the Bible is 100% truth. Then aske yourself: how can a perfect bible be written by imperfect men with the complete truth ? ANSWER: all gods people on earth are imperfect, but the prophets of the Bible were inspired and guided by jehova and the holy spirt.. hence why they Bible is truth and never changing. Now let's take that same perspective to the whatctowe or governing body. The governing body is filled by worldly men 7 of them. They claim to have divine guidance of jehova, Jesus and the holt spirit, yet so many of the watchtower publications and prophecies have turned out to be false. Why is this ? ANSWER: they are normal people of the earth claiming like all of us who and in fact not guided by anything, but their own motives if that was not the case the word would be true from the start and never change. Jehova days time and time again my word are not of confusion. Jehova would never guide people towards falseisms leading his people astray from the truth. It says this in the BIBLE ALL BIBLES