I accept most of the modern Scholar Biblical Criticism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_criticism
saying that the miracles as miracles are imposible.
My findings of science is that it does far more in proving the reality of the "intelligent design" (God) and far from disproving it.
The "big bang" proves a creation day, and the first thing was light as in - let there be light.
Even evolution shows an intelligent design(er).
So I find a bigger problem being in religions that promote "miracles" and supernatural as being a religious mistake.
Science is proving the miracles to be logical events and not supernatural at all.
I even confront some "Atheist" and most believe in stories like "Star Trek" and other Sci-Fi shows in that a person in the future could go back in time and claim to be Jesus (Yesu) and heal sick people (like a Dr. McCoy) or walk on water with an antigravity machine or teach an ethical doctrine like a Mr. Spock might do, so Jesus could be a fake from the future and that seems acceptable - but not the Bible at face value.
So now I have come to believe the miracles of the Bible might not be miracles at all, except that since mankind is so lost and uninformed then it looks like a miracle or supernatural and it is not supernatural at all.
Like I believe that God gave us the antibiotics and medicines so we can heal things just like a miracle while it is not really a miracle at all.
To destroy Nazi Germany then God was on the side of the American allies, but it was necessary for us to fight the war because a supernatural miracle is not how our world functions. Without us invading on "D-Day" then THAT miracle would not have happened.
I see this concept as an example of "apologetics" since it apologizes for the ignorance of mankind in the proof of God.
I am trying to show that science does in fact prove the existance of a very practical and non-magical God and not the mystical Orthodox versions of God.
Like the Star Trek TNG show where they went to a planet that had their God as a powerful alien in orbit around that planet http://www.startrek.com/startrek/view/series/TNG/episode/68324.html
So our "God" is a realistic creature and not a magic man, and thus science is bringing us closer to the truth and to the hidden secrets of God.
I say intelligent design is obvious in evolution and natrural selection because it is evolving in an upward and improved direction which is an intelligent direction and therefore ID. Without intelligent design then life would evolve both downward and deteriorating and not on a steady path to betterment.
The Bible is not the same as scientific research and the "six-day" creation story is NOT telling of the "big bang" as the 6 days are telling of re-newing the earth per Psalm 104:30, http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Psalm%20104:30%20;&versi
; and Genesis 1:2, http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis%201:1-3;&version
We have medicine that brings people back to life from the dead, we have evolution declaring life came out of a lifeless earth, and the Bible saying life was created out of dust - so it is different words for the same event.
And the Exodus story of Moses and God was really a vulcano giving a fire-light during the night time and a smoke covering cloud during the day time.
That is exactly what I see is the science is proving the miracles to be realistic events and thus showing us a more accurate account of what the Creator really is.
Religions claim to know about the Creator and religions are filled with errors and nonsense.
But the stupidity of religions does not cancel out the reality of a Creator and of intelligent design, and so science is now showing us a new interpretation of ID and of God.
Creator means inventor and science proves that the miracles are realistic events and not magic.
There is a peculiar story from the Bible that Christian Orthodoxy strangly has correct, in that it tells that God first created a race called "Angels" and a third of those Angels rebelled and caused WAR in the Heavens.
Most people just ignore the glaring revelation that this report is saying that God's invention (Angels) went sour and screwed up so God is not creating perfectly.
Later the famous story of the "Flood" is also saying that God's creation went wrong and He had to destroy it in failure.
These and many other Bible accounts show that God is not a perfect Creator.
Even Jesus being crusified is a sign that things were NOT working well.
So I say the common perception is incorrect in viewing human beings as insignificant to the universe when the exact opposite is in the evidence - that human beings are the ultimate and most complicated invention that has ever been constructed.
It is like us building the Space Shuttle and it blew up a couple times so the inventors make improvements and it blast off again and again. The Space shuttle was created as perfect as possible and then it still evolves just as mankind is evolving in an intelligent way.
The Orthodox claims of God being all-perfect, all-knowing, etc, is an exaggeration that is not told from the Bible.
Science is saying there is no intelligence in evolution and I see intelligence there big time.
I am saying that if the systems did deteriorate then that would be evidence of un-intelligent design.
Deterioration would be evidence of a stupid design(er).
So the reality that natural selection and evolution do improve is the very proof of intelligence.
I am saying it is based in some literal event as told in figuretive ways.
The six days are said to be six thousand (6,000) years, per 2Peter 3:8 link http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2%20Peter%203:8;&version
;, and there is is much more to that story that Orthodoxy leaves out. Like there are millions or billions of year between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2 link http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis%201:1-3;&version
That is me giving examples of science proving the "miracles" of the Bible to be realistic events and not acts of magic.
I do not know what God is.
Describing its nature and characteristics is all we have.
That is one big reason that I say science is giving us a more clear picture of what the Creator is, or what the intelligent designer is.
No one knows what it really is, and not even the various world scriptures tell us sufficiently of what it is.
For me I had experiences with ghost and spirits long before I believed in any God, so I go to scriptures to explain the so called supernatural and not finding God only inside some books.
In the US Civil War it was Abe Lincoln that saw God on the battlefields, and other people did not see the God until Abe pointed Him out for others to see.
Einstein saw God in science while others deny it.
The big example is the big-bang in that science has proven a creation day.
So now to claim there was no creation day is to deny both the scriptures and science, thus they support each other.
Since we do not know what God is - then whatever we call the God (or God concept) is irrellivant.
The science gives us proof of an intelligent design and that is evidence of an intelligent designer and so science is giving us a totally new deffinition of what God must be.
That is the point of science finding God - finding a God that no one knew before.
I used the Space Shuttle before as my example, and the fact that the Shuttle blew up a couple times is not a proof of unintelligent design.
The proof of intelligence is in the newer version that has the flaw repaired.
So that some life forms deteriorate and die is not the proof of unintelligence because the new life is a superior model.
The extinction of inferior versions of man being replaced by a superior version of mankind shows an intelligence. Just like an improved Space Shuttle build over the ruin of past failures.
The proof is from the failures.
Early man failed and died off. Then another form of improved man appeared.
And it failed again, then improved again, and etc.
So the proof is in the failure then improvement, thus intelligence.
Science is always being re-defined and religion / scriptures need to be redefined too.
I say many if not most Atheist are more correct then Orthodox religions but more correct is far from being right.
Saying our emergency medics can raise people from the dead but Jesus Christ certainly could not do it - that is a petty argument.