Hume distinguished the general arguments saying that all miracles claim to be a subject to certain failure. According to Hume, miracle itself is a violation of the laws of nature and our knowledge of miracles is more likely based on the testimony of others. However, the secondhand testimony is considered less reliable than if it was experienced by ourselves. In his section “Of Miracles”, Hume argues that we have no convincing reason to believe in miracles, and definitely not to see them as the basis for the religion. Belief should be based on evidence, and the evidence in favor of miracles comes form testimony of witnesses. Hume argued that both our knowledge of the laws nature as well as trust in the testimony of others come from experience.