Logical vs. Physical Possibilities

There are physical limitations on objects which don't constitute logical contradictions. For example, there is no logical contradiction in claiming that when someone pours a glass of water into a bucket, it will form the sculpture of a knight on a horse. However, the physical properties of water preclude this from happening, it is a physical impossibility. Another example would be a teapot orbiting the Andromeda galaxy at a hundred times the speed of light. The same could be said for many other such claims.

How does this relate to deities? Well, when one asks me what kind of evidence I would accept as evidence that their deity exists, I am kind of dumbfounded. Depending on the claim, for one, just demonstrating that it is possible such that an immaterial being can effect material objects, call it the "Casper problem." The Casper problem is that a ghost goes through objects and does not and is unable to interact with them. That something that is timeless can bring matter into existence, in effect bringing time into existence. That a changeless being can effect changes in the universe, for example, to start off the universe. Such statements by themselves or in conjunction with others may not form logical contradictions and are logically possible, but that does not mean that they are physically possible, which leads into a quote by "philosopher" William Lane Craig.

Only someone who has a proof of atheism, can deny the possibility of miracles because as long as God's existence is even possible, then it is possible that there are miracles...In the absence of a proof of god's non-existence, then he needs to be open to the possibility of miracles.-WLC

My first reaction would be somewhat to the effect of, there are certain ways that nature works, if you don't like it, go somewhere else; to another universe, where the natural laws are more simpler and more pleasing philosophically. Although, maybe we can put together some form of quick syllogism to acquiesce his request.

1. God is an immaterial being(def.)
2. Immaterial beings cannot effect material objects (Casper problem)
3. God cannot effect material objects. (1&2)
4. A miracle is God effecting one or more material objects (def.)
5. Therefore, there are no miracles. (1-4)

There, we have a sound syllogism saying that there are no miracles. We didn't even need to prove that he does not exist, all we need to show is that God can not interact with the physical universe. Showing just how flawed WLC's impromptu argument is.