Arguments for God's Existence from Contingency

[Mystic]

Arguments make use of premises.  Doing with what we observe in ourselves, we can use it to derive God. If those signs of God in us didn't exist, and we didn't know what we knew about ourselves with respect to the creator, we would not be able to prove God.

And all arguments from God make use to pointing to that connection that is a living thing, a connection that not only connects us to God, but connects us to one another, and all relationships make use of its judgment and perception and truths and it gives us our rights that no person or group of people can take away from us.

Atheists constantly make use of this connection in there living, in their relationships, etc, but are antagonistic towards what is in essence.  

Quran says (this is me paraphrasing the wage verses) love those who are that very connection to God so as to take a way to your Lord and be reminded of his light, and love them so as to properly love God and his creation, and love them as to gain eyes by which you can see and scent the holy scent.

The proof of God is with us, it not only proves God, it proves itself and what we are, and what everything is in truth.

Your reply seems to have no relationship whatsoever to my question.

All arguments from God don't prove things from purely abstract, but from what we observe in the signs in ourselves, and in things we acknowledge.

In fact, your phrase "argument alone" is confusing the issue of what arguments are. Arguments make use of facts we know.

For example the argument of ultimate value and the signs in ourselves, makes use that we see ourselves to have inherent objective value even if we aren't sure of what that is and what our measurement is.

I went into elaboration.

You show one argument for God that doesn't make use of observations or facts we know.