Why are other civilizations ignored in the Bible?

[DeistPaladin]

Your reasoning is clouded by your postmodernistic worldview.

You, like many others who have come to adopt the postmodern way of viewing reality, rule out the supernatural (miracles etc.) a priori.
...
Do you understand why this reasoning is fallacious?

The logical fallacies you're committing are Shifting the Burden of Proof, Special Pleading (see Rasetsu's posts) and Tu Quoque.

First of all, the burden of proof is on YOU to prove that miracles happen or that there is some sort of as yet undetected supernatural force out there. Your post accusing us of prematurely rejecting miracle claims out of a bias of naturalism is essentially saying "well, how do you know they DIDN'T happen?" This is not a valid challenge as it's an Argument from Ignorance.

In addition to having the burden of proof, your burden is extraordinary, scaling with the extraordinary nature of your claims.

From the moment we wake to the moment we go to sleep, the natural world is all we experience. There are those who claim otherwise but their claims have all either not been proven true or proven not to be true. Similarly, all historic claims of the supernatural that have since come to be understood have been replaced with natural explanations. We now know why wind blows, lightning strikes and the seas churn. At one time, gods or spirits were thought to be behind these events. As we understand our universe more, the more these gods are standing in the unemployment line, having been replaced with understood phenomena.

But you might say, "ah but in this case, it's true". This is where you get into the fallacy of special pleading. The "assumption of naturalism" that you deride is the very same assumption that YOU have once we move outside your favorite brand of woo. This can be seen in how we all evaluate claims in every other area of our lives outside of our religious ideology.

If I told you I had lunch with my wife, it's a mundane claim you'd accept with my testimony alone, assuming a lack of contrary evidence.

If I told you I had lunch with President Obama today, it's a fantastic claim you'd accept only with strong evidence, including video footage or news articles.

If I told you I had lunch with my dead father, passed away and cremated 10 years ago, and his body had reconstituted itself and he's much better now, you'd dismiss me as crazy or a liar. If I had video footage or hundreds of witnesses combined with credible news sources, you'd still be within the bounds of rational skepticism to suspect a hoax of some kind.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. This is how everyone operates in day to day life, religious faith being the only exception. It is not some stubborn preconception of naturalism at work here but consistently following logical inquiry in all areas and to all claims.

Finally, you've committed a projection or Tu Quoque (i.e. a "no, YOU!" argument). You want to justify your faith by claiming we have faith in science and the natural order of the universe. By trying to muddy the waters in this way, you're trying to in effect go for a "wash". As in, "oh well, we both have faith so I guess we see things differently." This is not a valid defense of your views. Just because "aw, c'mon, everybody does it" doesn't mean it's right. Moms and dads know this when children use this defense.

Your Tu Quoque is also a false comparison. Skepticism is not an agenda. Science is not a religion. Demanding evidence for supernatural claims is not a bias.