# Post hoc ergo propter hoc



## Davidius (May 2, 2007)

What is the relationship between this informal fallacy and "answered prayer"?


----------



## Civbert (May 2, 2007)

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/post-hoc.html

Post hoc ergo propter hoc is the fallacy of cause. 

A occurs before B. 
Therefore A is the cause of B. 

It's relationship to prayer is the idea that our prayers our the cause of God's actions. Or that if we hadn't prayed, God would have done otherwise. We pray, therefore the hurricane did not land. I believe this example can be attributed to Pat Robertson.


----------



## Davidius (May 2, 2007)

Civbert said:


> It's relationship to prayer is the idea that our prayers our the cause of God's actions. Or that if we hadn't prayed, God would have done otherwise. We pray, therefore the hurricane did not land. I believe this example can be attributed to Pat Robertson.



So can we not know whether events that happen are really answers to prayer?


----------



## Civbert (May 2, 2007)

CarolinaCalvinist said:


> So can we not know whether events that happen are really answers to prayer?


 That depends on what you think that implies. If you believe God answering prayer implies God's actions are caused by your prayers, then no. But anything God does is our answer to whatever we ask. It may not be the answer we want - it's God's will being done. All events follow from God's will.


----------



## Davidius (May 2, 2007)

Civbert said:


> But anything God does is our answer to whatever we ask. It may not be the answer we want - it's God's will being done. All events follow from God's will.



Good point.


----------

