Strongly disagree, it makes no sense to approach any claim with bias either way, being sceptical until sufficient objective evidence is demonstrated, is not bias, it’s setting a reasonable standard for credulity.
You also accused others of bias for not properly examining the claims of your religion, but you can’t possibly have done this for all religions, this is bias, and the very definition of being closed minded. The claims you’re making about miracles validating your belief are also the same as claims I see all types of Christians make for the bible. You can’t both be right, but you can both be wrong, and this makes your claim seem dubious to me.
I also don’t believe miracles are possible, as they use an [argumentum ad ignorantiam fallacy](Argument from ignorance - Wikipedia in the definition. I have linked an explanation of the fallacy, it makes the claim irrational by definition.
“Argument from ignorance (from Latin: argumentum ad ignorantiam), also known as appeal to ignorance (in which ignorance represents “a lack of contrary evidence”), is a fallacy in informal logic.”
Now here is the definition of miracle:
noun
an extraordinary and welcome event that is not explicable by natural or scientific laws and is therefore attributed to a divine agency.
So we can see that the part I’ve underlined uses the fallacy above, pay special attention to the part I underlined. It is important to note that claims for miracles do not demonstrate that something is not explicable by natural or scientific laws, but merely use this fallacy because we may not currently understand any natural or scientific explanation.