First, I'd never "start with the assumption that there is a God"
I was offering you the benefit of the doubt.
I am saying that the Bible provides abundant evidence that there is a God, a lot of it eyewitness evidence to miracles.
I look at the bible and see plenty of evidence that there were plenty of people who thought that there is a God. It is obvious to me that someone living 2500 yrs ago would see things happening every day that they could not explain. I am sure that if I were to witness any one of the miracles described in the bible I would offer a different explanation for what actually happened.
For example, I went looking for some modern day miracles and
found this account from some guy writing about modern day miracles.
quote:
When David Newkirk, now a youth pastor at Church of the Open Door in Glendora, California, woke up in the middle of the night, he was still exhausted from a college basketball victory the day before.
"Twenty minutes after my head hit the pillow, I was catapulted out of the deepest sleep," he writes in the book. Along with his mother and sister, he was jerked awake to pray for his brother Dan.
Dan was in Israel. Running out of money, he had chosen to sleep on a park bench for the night. In the wee hours of the morning, a snarling dog woke him up, battling with a chicken under the bench.
Unable to break up the animals, Dan found another bench and resumed his rest. The next morning, a bomb exploded right next to the first bench, hurtling it through the air, leaving "a mess of tangled metal and concrete."
So this guy describes it as a miracle. Is that evidence that a miracle has taken place? I would describe it as a fortunate coincidence and certainly not evidence for the existence of God.
Second, it's a strangely weak omnipotent God who couldn't guide human beings to an honest report of witnessed events.
My thoughts as well which is why I think that they would not rely on the stories of ancient shepards written on parchments that fade. They would instead use the rocks and stars and light to let us know what is really going on. They would use immutable laws so that there could be no mistaking if you are right or wrong in your perception. Which, if there is a God, they have done.
Three a: the physical universe has to be interpreted too, there is nothing straightforward about what it presents to the human mind or it wouldn't have taken thousands of years before we learned anything of use about it.
Suck it up Buttercup! Who ever said that anything was going to be straightforward? Besides, when the child asks a question, do you just give them the answer or do you try and show them how to figure out the answer?
Three b: Show me where the physical universe gives evidence of what the Bible reveals of the Creation and Fall or the Flood or God's plan of redemption or the need for salvation answered by the incarnation of God Himself to die for us?
On this you are correct. There doesn't seem to be any evidence whatsoever.
We simply believe the Bible is the undistorted truth given by God Himself.
Why though is the question. How can these accounts be more credible than the Universe that is spread out before you? Why should they deserve more weight than what you can see with your own eyes?
™ Version 4.2
(1)