Umm...

what makes a premise valid or invalid?

Your subjective opinion?

If so, then it is probably not possible to do as you ask.

Likewise with an argument proving that the planet Pluto exists

simply because the "validity" of the (maximum two) premises could be questioned

(and in logic that is a quite valid tactic).

Two things for you to mull over: 1) The structure, operation, and function of the eye. This defies a godless world of evolution. Even in the animal world, the eye defies evolutionary advancement. 2) The human mind: when did mankind advance from simple animal instinct, to the ability to learn, evaluate, and reason through experiences, and develop a moral code to live by? This too defies godless evolution, and both of these examples point to a designer/creationist who placed these things in within the human design to enhance our lives. And on a more frivolous note, if humans evolved from apes or monkeys, why have not those species become extinct?

Of course! No one can become a Christian on blind faith. We are commanded to have a reason for the hope that is within us. If not, then we do not even know what we believe.

Pretty simple really. Set laws (which are everywhere in the Universe) show there has to be a Something greater then the Universe to set those laws. There is no other way.

If by "argument" you mean a syllogism, where the conclusion that God exists follows from the premises, I doubt you're likely to agree the premises offered are valid. All arguments I've ever seen for God's existence--or for God's non-existence--are circular.

This includes the much-ballyhooed arguments of Aquinas. But I suspect Aquinas was not really thinking of his arguments as proving anything; rather, that he was offering ways we could THINK about God, if we chose.

About the best I can offer is that belief in God works for me, and that's why I choose that belief. To be clear, I have two criteria for its "working":

(a) Consistency with everything else I know (including all proven scientific theory); and

(b) Effectiveness, in that my belief motivates me to behave in ways I consider best (admittedly, a subjective evaluation).

When you ask a question like that, from a Christian's viewpoint, it's the same as a flat-earther asking the following: "Can a logically minded round-earther form an argument for the earth being round using one OR two valid premises? I say it can’t be done will u show me?" No matter what evidence is presented by the round-earther, it will be rejected by the flat-earther, so he or she learns not to waste time with such a person.

Knowledgeable Christians don't waste time trying to prove the obvious.

Rom 1:19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. 20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly [or obviously] seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

Not a Christian myself, but the best argument for God I know of is that He is a subjective mental phenomenon occurring within a living human brain. Although I have a scientific worldview, I offer this explanation because I know that Christian theology is heavily dependent on ancient Aristotelian philosophy (Solipsism), which purports that personal mental experiences are the basis of reality while also denying the objective existence of physical matter.

My own opinion, which agrees with Rene Descartes (1641), is that Aristotle got it backwards, that subjective mental experiences are unreal abstractions created within every person's mind by their own living brain, and that objective physical matter is absolutely real and exists independently of human mental processes. Although I was raised by Pentecostals, I eventually concluded they were merely worshiping their own euphoria-induced hallucinations.

FYI: Humanity abandoned ancient philosophy 377 years ago, at the dawn of the Enlightenment -- which is why we now have science.

Since there is no such thing as a valid premise it can't be done.

- 1. God exists because the Bible says so.

- 2. The Bible is true because it's the Word of God.

- 3. Go to 1.

Update: Muslims have the same algorithm (an Arabic word by the way)

Everything which begins to exist has a cause. The universe began to exist. Therefore, Jesus created it.

I know plenty of Christians besides myself, that don't need to prove the existence of God, for us to believe.

It's actually mind boggling for you to think that there are people who are Christians that don't require evidence of God's existence.

If you, or someone else wants to prove the existence of God, then go right ahead, but leave us the hell alone!!!