عنوان مقاله [English]
According to divine religions, the perfect man can perform miracles and can prove his prophecy through miracles. However, in the west, David Hume has attacked the validity of miracles, holding that reported miracles cannot refute the validity of our constant and continuous sensory experiences. He believes that miracles have been reported in particular situation and by ignorant nations. Likewise, the testimonies of miracles have some defeaters, and it undermines reliability of miracles. This doubts, more detailed and slightly different, have been asserted many centuries ago by Fakhr Razi. However, the difference is that Hume concluded invalidity of miracles, while Fakhr Razi endeavored to reply them, based on his viewpoints taken from Asharites, and defend the soundness of miracles. Comparatively analyzing of Hume and Fakhr Razi, this paper analyzes the responses of Fakhr Razi concerning these doubts, showing the degree of their validity, then finally criticize the doubts of Hume, replying them in a rational way.