A literal interpretation of the Bible is mutually exclusive to scientific advancements, but most people do not interpret the Bible literally. Some see the Resurrection of Jesus as a nonliteral Resurrection, mind you he did die metaphorically for their "sins" so perhaps a Resurrection implies that Jesus (god) would be willing to forgive again. The sea parting in two has never been recorded but it is likely that the story has been exaggerated to make it appear more interesting and more inspiring - that doesn't take away from the story in general. And as I've stated in previous threads, almost all the value of the Bible comes from nonliteral interpretations - just like how the value of most other stories come from.
I understand where you're coming from, I actually used to thought about this at some point, but to me it just boils down to performing mental gymnastics to make sense of coexistence of science and religion, and ultimately results in reverse engineering passages that don't fit their scientific purposes, often completely changing their original meaning.
As for the bolded part, that's the premise of religion - making these stories interesting, as you call it, by filling with scientific impossibilities like the Parting of the Red Sea to try to persuade the readers of god's "greatness" and get them to have faith to believe in it.
Again, it's a good effort to try to persue their scientific and religious endeavors, and convince themselves to believe in both principles, but I believe inherently science and religion are like water and oil - they do not mix. I do respect the scientists who believe in both principles, I merely disagree with their belief.
@Lucky#13
Role of science and religion Question.
I believe that the two go hand in hand quite honestly. A few people I know use the phrase "Religion is the why and Science is the how."
Does religion really provide the correct answers for the "why" questions though - no one knows, so what's the point of asking those "why" questions in the first place? I know science we have discovered so far provides correct "how" answers because they are based on empirical research and evidence, not by faith.
The examples in an above post showing a few of the contradictions are supposed to emphasize another main message that the bible teaches, "Through faith all things are possible." meaning that with strong enough faith anything is possible.
That's the flaw with faith in the first place, though. Faith requires belief without evidence, and it's actually a dangerous concept if you think about it, because you can use faith to justfiy pretty much any action you commit.
And if inquiring questions about trying to find out why I should believe in god without evidence results in an "all-loving" god sending me to hell to be burned and tortured for eternity then so be it.
Interesting couple of questions
Why bother following? Ultimately God will judge all. (partial answer to all three)
What God wants is for us to love him and each other. Half of that can be done without following Christianity. It is difficult to love something you don't believe in. Not one that likes to quote scripture a lot but "Jesus answered I am the way and the truth and the light. No one comes to the Father except through me." John 14:6
Why bother avoiding committing sin?
I will build off of my previous answer.
Sin drives a wedge between you and God. It is all about how close you are to God.
Why would people still go to hell?
You can't just give everyone a free pass. Building off of the above again.
This is why the acceptance of Jesus into your heart is such a prominent thing. By accepting him into our hearts he is able to share with you that eternal life in Heaven. Without us accepting him into our hearts, his dying for our sins would be pointless.
Let me ask you something - If you're born parts of the world where it's currently impossible for Christianity to flourish (e.g. Middle East), are you doomed for eternity because they can't accept a Judeo-Christian God? It seems messed up that many people are doomed to be burned and tortured in hell from the get-go.
And what if someone dies as an infant (not that I wish this on anyone in the future), who are yet mentally incapable of accepting Jesus their hearts? Are they given no chance before they are told they need to go to hell because they didn't accept Jesus?