Re: What is a "miracle"?
Since this topic is still alive, let me give an overview of miracles.
Popular and common understanding of the word 'miracle' is an event that somehow breaks the laws of nature and is a direct result of intervention by a power outside nature - usually God.
This definition has problems both scientifically and theologically.
Scientifically, the problem is that laws of nature are determined by empirical observation. So if an event is observed that violates a law of nature then the law is modified to include that event. So an event may violate a particular law but there is really no such thing as unnatural or supernatural events.
As for the famous scriptural miracles their occurrence cannot be verified scientifically. There has been no physical or even historical evidence to establish any of the miraculous events mentioned in any religious scripture.
Theologically, the problem is that this view reduces God to a being in space and time. His actions are directly visible in space and time and can be clearly differentiated from other actions that are not attributed to him. This reduces God to merely a being, even though the most powerful one. Such a concept is actually irreligious.
Also, the idea that God would need to break his own laws to correct something undermines his Omnipotence and Omniscience.
Serious students of religion have always understood miracles in a deeper way.
Miracle is not an unnatural event. It is a perfectly natural event. But the special context of the event inspires a profound wonder in those who experience it and makes them aware of the presence of God. This is entirely a subjective experience. But it is as real as other subjective experiences like love or despair. Of course, 'the presence of God' does not refer to a physical phenomenon but points to a non-physical level of reality that transcends physical reality.
This view clearly separates miracle from illusion and quackery.
In case of illusion or quackery (or even technology) we are amazed because we cannot explain the event. Once a satisfactory explanation is offered our amazement dissipates. With a miracle our sense of wonder remains intact in spite of fully understanding the physical causes of the event.
With this view of miracles it is possible to accept scriptural miracles as having occurred and consider them perfectly natural but extremely unusual events. Their extreme improbability and occurrence at crucial junctures in history is what inspired in people a strong enough sense of wonder to call them miraculous.
However, I personally do not subscribe to this view. If we look at ancient religious literature and traditions we see that symbolic language is an essential part of them. Symbolic language is used to describe aspects of events that cannot be described in simple descriptive ways. This is what I consider these 'miracle stories' to be. They use symbolic language to describe the powerful sense of wonder associated with the event.
For example, in the case Prophet Musa(R) leading Israelites out Egypt, there is no real independent evidence that anything unusual happened. However, the escape of slave tribes from a powerful tyrant was such a momentous event for the Israelites that they considered it miraculous. That is why their recollection of it includes symbolic language that tries to communicate their sense of wonder.
Lastly, let us not forget that God himself speaks in symbolic language, as He has said in the Quran.