The Exodus story contains numerous miracles. But one of the biggest miracles involved in taking the Exodus story literally is only likely to be noticed if you try to correlate the Exodus story in the Bible with external evidence from ancient Egypt, the history of which is well documented not only by royal and other formal inscriptions, but also in surviving correspondence, fiscal transaction records, and other textual as well as archaeological evidence.

To treat the Exodus story as literal, factual history, one would have to believe that at some point God devastated the agriculture, economy, and military of Egypt, and yet somehow not only no king but no other person saw fit to mention these events in a letter.

Which is the greater miracle? Believing that God sent plagues and drowned soldiers? Or believing that God ensured that no one in Egypt made any mention of these occurrences and that no shred of tangible archaeological evidence would be left?

It doesn’t seem to me that you can believe in the one without the other. And if believing the latter miracle seems too much for you, then a non-literal reading of the Exodus story, which doesn’t treat it as factual history, would seem the best path for you to take.