What about the Pantheist definition of God. Where God is the naturalistic universe following the laws of nature. I think it is totally valid to assume that is what is being meant since pantheism is the fastest growing religion in the world right now.
Anyway even if we believe in the Catholic Christian definition of God... then ...still ... no. We don't think that way. God created the laws of nature. The laws of nature is Gods work. When/if God breaks the laws of nature, then those breaks would be included in the laws of nature.
So it gets reduced to a semantic inconsistency. A miracle is the laws of nature being broken, but every break results us to redefine nature to incorporate the breaks as intrinsic to its laws. So with our paradigm of how we think of nature, miracles are impossible. We have no way of recognizing laws of nature being broken as described in the Bible in our language. Christianity rests on that humans/science reject certain Godly laws of nature, only to use the same as evidence of Gods existence. Confusing?
How about that for developing my position? It's just a matter of perspective.
Wasn't it the Muslim philosopher Avicenna who said that there's no point in doing science since everything is a miracle? Everything that happens is Gods will, so why bother studying it? Basically that everything is a miracle so the acts of Jesus, was just as normal/abnormal as everything else.
And even if we're atheist, and God exists. If a trajectory goes straight for 15 billion years and then wobbles a bit, science just assumes that the wobble is nature, and normal, no matter what caused it, and expect that it'll wobble again 15 billion years later. No matter its divine origin science will never understand it as a miracle. We have no way of detecting breaks in the laws of nature even if they did take place.
Christianity and the monotheistic theory of God is not philosophically or scientifically simple. I don't think it's possible to be Christian and understand your faith without studying philosophy for fucking ages. I know a guy who's done that. But he's stripped away so much from Christianity to make it consistent that it would be unrecognisable for the common unread evangelical Christian. Threads like this gloss over the philosophical problems. The interesting bits. And if one doesn't care, then why discuss it?
Was this thread only about affirming ones faith? Not understanding it? My left eye twitches when I come into contact with blind faith propaganda.