"Any op can ban you for any reason."
"Do not argue with the ops."
"Do not piss the ops off."
Those are 100% valid rules if the ops of a channel choose to use them. Just because you don't like those rules, doesn't mean they can't be used in that channel as justification for banning you. The simple fact is, that the ops do not need any reason or proof for banning you. It is their channel and they can do whatever they want in their channel, and it has nothing to do with faith.
For example: I don't agree with the 100km/h (60MPH) speed limit on the highway near my house. I'm not required
to obey that speed limit. However, if I choose to speed, and I get caught, the fact that I don't agree with the law is irrelevent, and I will still get a speeding ticket. If I then pay that ticket and choose to continue speeding after warnings and punishment have been given, then I will encur more severe punishments (loss of driving licence). To relate more back to your complaint, if I happened to be friends with one of the police officers who pulled me over for speeding slightly over the speed limit, that officer may choose to give me only a warning. But why would one person get a ticket, and another get a warning? The answer is discretion. It is up to the officer to choose whether to warn or ticket.
Now, I know you will point out that speeding is a measurable quality, and you are correct on that point. So that example would more closely correspond to your 83% caps statement. A more subjective example, keeping with the driving example, would be 'dangerous driving'. There is no 'danger-ometer'.