Mock dialogue of the Theist/Atheist discussion here.

[robvalue]

Since you're not responding to my points, which others have similarly raised, I will just put down my thoughts for others to see. This is for your benefit as well.

I think you're very conflicted and you can't reconcile your beliefs with reality. Clearly so, because whenever someone disagrees with you, you start talking about "demons and dark forces". With this mental attitude, you can and will never learn when you are wrong because you just explain anyway any differences with magic. This idea undermines your entire position, because any such hazard applies equally to you. Everything you say is also subject to whatever these "dark forces" are, and so if you're putting that forward as a premise, you should not believe anything you yourself think is true, because it may be being warped by these things. So either we agree to focus on what is being said and what we can demonstrate in reality, or we talk about magic and achieve nothing.

It really is pointless. Watch this: "There is no God. If you disagree with me, you're affected by a demon."

What does that achieve? Even if it's true, it's a pointless statement to make which does not further conversation. (I mean, even if you really are affected by a demon.) The inference does not hold, even if it happens to be true in some cases. (Which we never have any reason to believe it us, since demons like most religious statements are unfalsifiable and therefor useless.)

You simply can't acknowledge that you might be wrong. You talk about us as if we're just wrong, and need correcting. Very bad attitude to have. Even if you pay lip service to this point, as soon as you're into an argument, you're straight back to assuming you're right without evidence.

Your logic is bad. Even if it was good, you just have arguments. Arguments are not evidence. Until you understand this point, you're banging your head against a wall talking to any sceptic. Arguments take a simplified model of reality, and produce a result (when applied properly) only relevant to that simplified reality. It's not necessarily true that the result applies in any meaningful way to our reality, due to the nature of the simplifications. Therefor it is very important to check the results with evidence. If there is none, it is just too bad I'm afraid. A sceptic has no need to prove you wrong, or to even say you are wrong. A sceptic just dismisses anything not supported by evidence because it's mere conjecture.

We don't believe your beliefs. End of story. Why this matters so much to you says way more about you than us.