How did David Hume question the credibility of reported miracles?

In his influential work An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding, the philosopher David Hume questioned the credibility of reported miracles by applying an empirical, probabilistic approach rather than dismissing them as logically impossible.12

Hume’s critique centered on the principle that a "wise man proportions his belief to the evidence". He argued that because human experience consistently demonstrates the uniformity of nature, the probability of a miracle occurring is extremely low. Conversely, the likelihood that a witness is mistaken, deceived, or lying is significantly higher.21

Methodologically, Hume contended that the standards required for historical evidence make it impossible to establish a miracle as a reliable foundation for religious systems. He emphasized that the principles a historian must use to interpret past events inherently preclude the verification of miraculous claims. By shifting the focus from the metaphysical possibility of miracles to the assessment of historical testimony and probability, Hume challenged the standard framework of Christian apologetics, which relied heavily on miracles to authenticate divine revelation.21