[DungeonMaster]

But more important, there's no need to reject God to accept scientific findings and visa versa -- it's not either or. It is certainly a matter of understanding where the natural realm ends and the supernatural begins.

Actually I think that the bible and "observation" are in direct conflict. The first example that comes to mind is the biblical statement about the age of the universe being 6000 years and science which is limited to observation and can only see a universe that is billions of light years in size. Science is blind to miracles as you said. Creation is a miracle per the bible so they must conflict.

[Mechanicos]

But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.
2 Peter 3:8

Do the Math, its similar so no conflict.

[Elsie]

... the biblical statement about the age of the universe being 6000 years...

I seem to have MISSED this data in my bible.

[BroJoeK]

DungeonMaster: "The first example that comes to mind is the biblical statement about the age of the universe being 6000 years."

Nowhere does the Bible say the Earth is 6,000 years old.
It does speak of days of creation, but does not tell us how long those days were in today's time frames.

Mechanicos quoted 2 Peter 3:8, but the Old Testament is even clearer:

Psalm 90:4 "For a thousand years in thy sight are but as yesterday when it is past, and as a watch in the night."

The Psalmist tells us a thousand years to God can be as a day, or as a "watch", maybe four hours, which is it?
His point is such time periods are indeterminate, indeed irrelevant in God's eyes.

So, in this case there need be no direct conflict between observations of science and revelations from the Bible.

DungeonMaster: "Creation is a miracle per the bible so they must conflict."

The Bible tells us God created, but does not tell us how.
Science can suggest some of the "how", assuming natural explanations for natural processes.
That's it.