Often, miracles have been seen as evidence of deity. Throughout the New Testament, tales of miracles occurring by the hands of God working through Jesus Christ are told as truth. Ignoring the amount of proof there has been found about the resurrection of Christ and various other miracles told in the Bible, David Hume believes miracle to be a fallacy. According to Hume, no matter how much proof there is, since miracles are contradictory to natural law, they cannot exist. Hume states that the laws of nature were built on concrete, unchangeable experiences and because any miracle can be imagined, a miracle should be understood as false. He gives the example of a healthy man who dies has been seen time and time. To Hume this event is more probable rather than a dead man brought back to life since it has never been seen. Hume declares if a person where ever to tell him that a man raised from the dead, his immediate reaction would be either this person was lied to or is lying to me. A lie would seem more probable in this case. Hume asserts no experience of a miracle would ever be true unless if it was just a lie. He also verifies that no miracle has ever occurred because one has never been established on full evidence. A person should believe an event that has greater evidence. For me, this argument is not sufficient and a bit contradictory. How can one not believe in miracles if a person sees something unexplainable happen in front of them? Does that person than believe that there eyes have then deceived them and the event cannot be true because it does not follow the natural laws? Everyday people witness miracles, but to Hume miracles do not exist so they would be liars. An example would be if a man were to witness a family member’s cancer just disappear out of the astonishment of the doctors and nurses. This would be a miracle, an event that has occurred before that no one has an explanation for. Although, according to Hume, this event is not possible since it defies the natural laws. Also, in reference to Hume, a person should believe the event that has the most evidence. Today, with the right tools, I can