Yes.. except in the totalitarian world this guy invented, in each of theses scenarios I’ve seen either qualified men lose their appointments, or others like myself put on restrictions.
And I have seen the exact opposite. I’ve been a part of three separate congregations, spanning 15 years. In each of these, all the elders had plenty of liquor. My entire family is into this damn religion, and in each of their houses there is a liquor cabinet - stocked. My in-laws having the largest, and my FIL is an active elder now. When I was studying, a long time ago, the man studying with me, also an elder at the time, would have wine tasting parties. There were some older aged scotch there too if you wanted a sample.
But, for all of these experiences the rule was no drunkenness. The liquor cabinets I see aren’t emptied in a day, a week, a month, or even a year.
I don’t doubt that some witness struggle with alcoholism, but possessing a bunch of alcohol has never been a sign of drunkenness to me.
Something doesn't need to be a disfellowshipping offense for it to be hypocrisy. What if a GB member sent their children to University and encouraged them to pursue a career in medicine? What if they bought a Rolls Royce? What if they only did 1 hour a month door-to-door and refused to submit to the public humiliation of of standing beside a trolley?
Right. I get that. But I’ve haven’t seen any such advice given concerning alcohol, EXCEPT flat out drunkenness, excesses, being “given to wine”, etc. And as I have said, merely possessing the alcohol and drinking slowly over time is not excessive. A lot of people I know, witnesses and non-witnesses (I’ve gotten to know some evangelicals since being out), have liquor caches, and they buy the liquor in spirts. It isn’t consumed quickly.
Any average JW might do all of these things and avoid being DFd. They might even be viewed as a JW in good standing. But for one of the law-givers of 8 million JWs to do these things is rank hypocrisy. So is spending 800 dollars on whisky.
Why? Like I said, and you have said above, it happens all the time without losing standing.
'For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required' - Luke 12:48
Alright, so this is a different principle. It is along the lines of Vanderhoven7’s post. Basically, because some small fraction might see this and freak out, he shouldn’t do it at all. That’s the same principle Paul applied to the early Christians that wanted to eat a good pork chop. Basically, the line of reason is : It’s not a sin, but there are retards among us, so for their sake, don’t do it. That logic always rubbed me the wrong way, but alright. If you want to apply that here, then buying the scotch the way he did would be consistent with that principle. So here is the question, given the doctrines and standing of the organization, do you think a member of the GB can purchase scotch at a liquor store?