Lol, what assumptions weren't made? He doesn't seem to want to understand anything I am saying. And he is clearly mad at anything he associates with religion, which is understandable, but not particularly good for anyone. 

 I didn’t ask you, I asked Guy. He’s the intelligent articulate and well-read dude… Guy, what assumptions were made by Bitburn about Jeff’s beliefs? 

 You know he's my brother, right? 

 Look, I don’t wanna be rude but I’m gonna need to see a DNA test. Even with the same last name, I don’t believe it. 

 Well this section is full of what sounds like previous baggage (with respect)

“I don't have to kill god because he is imaginary. But go ahead and believe your delusions. I support everyone's rights to fantasize about heaven or hell. Problem is, is that most of y'all miss the life in front of you.”

- seems to assume Jeff believes in some “dude in the clouds” idea of god.
- instead of addressing a comment about morality and what leading the Bible may be teaching, which is a question of values, he instead assumes some apparently long list of “delusion” which aren’t relevant to anything in the OP.
- “fantasize about heaven or hell,” also not brought up in the OP, but argued as if there was something said about these that demanded a counter argument, which didnt exist.
-“most of y’all miss the life in front of you,” again nothing to suggest anything about “missing life” or even a single thing related to how Jeff goes about his day or whether it is limited by something the Bible says. 
- And then of course the key identifier of “most of y’all,” showing that he is arguing with an imaginary group in his head, rather than anything Jeff’s actually said.


From what I read, it sounds like he has just brought in a bunch of religious baggage to continue an argument about religion he has had with people who believe an extensive list of things that have nothing to do with the OP. And then even extends this multiple steps forward as if Jeff’s life is somehow restricted by these believes that didn’t exist.

It’s funny because I bet Jeff has many of the similar complaints and was *actually* trying to address them in his post.

What I interpreted from the comment is his suggestion that Jeff adheres strictly to what the Bible says, believes in a dude in the sky, thinks people either go to heaven or hell according to their acceptance of it, that he even makes life decisions to align with arbitrary dictates of the Bible and that this results in his life to be empty and meaningless, and then that he and all those like him are delusional for it…

Which is funny because I know Jeff doesn’t believe any of that. And his entire point was to address a lesson the stories of the Bible attempt to teach, that most Christians misunderstand because they are so certain the entire thing is as literal as a recipe of ingredients.

TL;DR, the list of assumptions in his short post was actually quite extensive. 

 Well, with mutual respect for you, Guy, thank you for such a thoughtful play by play. I might offer a counterpoint earlier in the timeline though. Might you be making an assumption that he is refuting anything Jeff stated. I don’t see any attempt. It’s written in passive voice. I see a passing comment, that views Christians in a certain light and nothing was directed at Jeff. Even the “go ahead and believe your delusions” in context, was generalized at all believers. Dude seems to be making a passing comment about a topic, and generalizing about believers and the bible, not arguing or refuting. 

Your bro complains that people don’t “get him or make attempts to understand him”. I think thats the problem. Engage baiting, with religion is cause for misunderstandings, like putting “politics divide” in your bio and then posting political. I believe the first flawed assumption is that Jeff’s point was being refuted at all vs a passing comment and now we all get to see a tantrum. But hey, you know what they say about assume… anyway… that’s my take. 

 Well, he did make one direct assumption- they have different bibles.