Throughout this conversation you also commited the same fallacies somehow and seem to not understand bayesian reasoning

This is an obvious falsehood. You're making a bald accusation with zero examples.

false equivalency to France invading Russia

I explained in depth why it was not false. If you want to pretend that it was because it wasn't literally 1 to 1 at every single point, then you fail to understand the purpose of analogies.

On a side note I thought you were bringing up a fake invasion of Russia

You've never heard of Napoleon. Wow.

The real one even Russians will agree happened

What does that have to do with anything? Paul was a Roman citizen, so your claim that the Romans didn't believe is false, but of course that had nothing to do with it whatsoever. What you want is someone who is a NON CHRISTIAN. That doesn't make any sense! Why don't we ask for someone who doesn't believe that the invasion of Russia happened to accept the invasion of Russia? Oh yeah, because that's totally self contradictory!

All you've done is strawman me and atheist

I can also say fallacies you didn't commit. Post hoc ergo proper hoc! Ipse dixit! Affirming the consequent!

I'll just hope you don't know what those mean so they will stick.

My advice is don't bring up talk about fallacies and bayesian reasoning anymore cause you clearly aren't up to task.

Dunning and Kruger would surely have a field day here.