What is the best way to counter the Bishop's opening?

I played 3 blitz games in a row that started with the Bishop's opening and I got destroyed 2 times but managed to win one. It started with

The first thing you need to understand is that openings DO NOT determine your games. 

What did determine the outcomes of those games, and your other games?  BLUNDERS.

Follow opening principles, and double check your moves.

Did Namesnipe say anything about openings determining games?

I am only about 1500, but, for what it is worth, my instinct would be to go for 3...Bc5 .

"... Sure, fast games are fine for practicing openings (not the most important part of the game for most players) and possibly developing decent board vision and tactical 'shots', but the kind of thinking it takes to plan, evaluate, play long endgames, and find deep combinations is just not possible in quick chess. … for serious improvement ... consistently play many slow games to practice good thinking habits. ..." - NM Dan Heisman (2002)

https://web.archive.org/web/20140627052239/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/heisman16.pdf

The Bishop's Berlin (1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Nf6) is the best way to counter it and there are many ways to counter that.

1)Vienna Transposition

2) Anti-Bishop's Berlin(Main Line)

3) Elephant Gambit with Colors Reversed

4) Latvian Gambit with colors reversed

5) Petrov Counterattack, Main Line

The 5 above are most sound, all others simply lose a pawn or get a bad/passive position.

Did Namesnipe claim, at some point, to have only one problem?

Lets look at your last game...Hopefully this helps explain that the opening was not the issue.

Who said anything about the opening being "the issue" (other than you)?

The OP did when he asked if "there any better way to play against Bishop's opening, if not then how can I push after d6?"  Notice that there were no games posted and no questions asked about other mistakes that may have been made.

IMBacon and darwinwasright were focusing on the true problem instead of answering the wrong question.  That will benefit Namesnipe more in the long run.

So, if Namesnipe posted a question about the age of Caruana, you believe that it would be appropriate to presume that Namesnipe believed that the age of Caruana was “the issue”?

Is there a rule somewhere that one is not allowed to post a question in the Chess Openings section without posting games and questions about other mistakes?

For that purpose, is it necessary to make a presumption about a supposed incorrect belief of Namesnipe about “the true problem”?

Did someone grant you (or IMBacon or darwinwasright) the authority to decide what questions are wrong in the Chess Openings section?

Is there any reason to believe that “benefit” can only be achieved by making a presumption about a supposed incorrect belief of Namesnipe?

How is Caruana's age relevant to the discussion???  Why are you trying to take a fact that is irrelevant to make your argument about facts that are relevant when it comes to improving as a chess player.

The age question illustrates (I hope) that a question is not necessarily an identification of “the issue”.

If it will make you happy, I can illustrate the same point by using a question that is “relevant when it comes to improving as a chess player.” Suppose someone asked about whether or not it would be helpful to do some reading in the book, Discovering Chess Openings? Would it make sense to presume that the person considered that to be “the issue”?

There is a better way to counter the Bishops Opening . It's with what is called the Khan gambit . e4 e5 Bc4 d5 and if bxd5 then qf6 and if exd5 then bd6