I didn't hear of Etagloc's possible reprimand of you, Rainerann? I truly have nothing against him, but anyway, my beef is regarding "T" and hey FWIW, we know that we don't fully agree on GIF
I don't know that we disagree on GIF. I just feel like people are pretending to not remember what he said when he was here. He specifically said on repeated occasions that he was willing to be banned for speaking about God outside of the religion section. It would make sense that he believed that the rules of the forum don't apply to him because they are not based on Islam. It would then make sense to create sock accounts because of this because we know that GIF did not do or promote anything that couldn't be justified with his faith in some way. This new account is another Muslim poster after Tomcat and Ahmad were banned in the last couple weeks. Obviously, not every new member who is Muslim is a sock account because of this, but the question is still legitimate and the subject is still recent enough to ask.
I don't really have a problem with GIF either outside of the fact that I think he was sharing his account which is why some of his posts before he was banned were very aggressive and sometimes insulting, which is like the altar ego of the other GIF who likes everything. I also do like a place to discuss things and take a break from the religious component that creates disputes and GIF often made this difficult. Although, I don't remember when we didn't agree on GIF before but it doesn't matter.
Overall, it was just a question that was a simple yes or no with maybe some clarifying reason for whatever response that would be given.
The article in the opening post actually continues to call Muslims unbelievers if they identify according to a denomination rather than embracing everyone who accepts Islam even going so far as to call them an unbeliever.
That's a whole other can of worms to consider. It brings up the question of how a law of God is tested because many people think they know the law of God and use this belief to break rules in other places and it is the belief that God requires different things that separate the denominations in any religion. So what does God require? This is why the absence of clarification within the opening statement of obeying God instead of the rules of man is concerning. Essentially, it creates a sort of lawlessness without clarification or bounderies that infringe on the rights of others to enforce rules within a forum like this for an example.