I'm all too used to my argument being put in a box and dismissed with a standard argument for that box. But please don't do that, OK? Hell is nowhere in this c

I'm all too used to my argument being put in a box and dismissed with a standard argument for that box. But please don't do that, OK? Hell is nowhere in this chain of argument. God arguably is, but that's in step 2. It's step 3 which may kinda, sorta remind you of Pascal's Wager, but it's only an argument against nihilism, not even for theism. Yes, conceding step 3 leaves wide open the question of what to believe in instead of nihilism. Even conceding step 2 leaves open the question of "what sort of god are we talking about". But this is precisely the point. That means you can argue these things separately, while still acknowledging your opponent's ultimate concern.