God Actually

by Roy Williams

Book by Williams, Roy

Genres: Religion

386 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 2008

Reviews

[Lisa · Rating 5 out of 5]

I've read such books before but this is by an Australian and as during my year here I'm trying to read more books by them, and a friend here gave it to me--I ventured in. I enjoyed it more than any other like this. He's a bit conservative/sexist on gender but the rest of it is a refreshingly eclectic approach with great chapters on suffering and love. He doesn't try to line up with any denomination and most will find something to actively dislike, but the range of evidence and evaluation was just really interesting and compelling.

[Peter · Rating 4 out of 5]

Why should we believe in God? It's a question that has exercised the minds of sceptics and unbelievers for centuries. It is also a question that exercised the mind of Roy Williams, a former lawyer and former agnostic. In God Actually Williams has given us a wide-ranging and provocative defence of Christianity, in which he contends that belief should be based on logical deductions from known facts: it is not a matter of superstition or blind faith.

For twenty years, Williams practised as a lawyer at the highest level and he brings his analytical skills to bear in order to show that belief in Christianity can and should be based on evidence and reason. The vital place of doubt and uncertainty in God's creation is a recurring theme for Williams as he develops his thesis that it is possible to demonstrate that Christianity is probably true; but no more. He contends that there is a vital role for faith, a much-misunderstood concept that he seeks to explore.

Williams makes the assumption that most modern-day readers who are not already Christians will be unconvinced solely by appeal to biblical authority and so he explains the Bible rather than citing it uncritically. Using many examples drawn from science, politics, history, sociology and the arts, he tackles all the biggest questions by appealing to evidence and to reason. In doing so, he explains why the Bible remains profoundly relevant to life in the twenty-first century.

By skillfully dissecting all the main arguments for atheism, Williams pinpoints many weaknesses in the work of best-selling atheist authors such as Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens. To counter their arguments Williams writes in a formal style, but it is still fluent and easily accessible, and the work has been carefully researched and footnoted, making it suitable also for academic purposes.

[Laura · Rating 1 out of 5]

Here's the basics of the book in case you don't want to waste too much time reading it: God must be real because the universe works, and he just doesn't see how that could happen without a creator. And if you go into this assuming God exists, this all makes sense and you can't say it doesn't. Man exists, water exists, man has cognition and concience, and man is capable of love and music. And again, he doesn't see how that could have occurred without a creator. Oh, and because the Bible says so. Jesus must have been real because he is mentioned a couple times in writings other than the Bible, because people wouldn't have followed him if he didn't really perform miracles (maybe they don't know what cults are in Australia?), oh, and because the Bible says so. My two favorites were when he says that basically everyone is a Christian if they follow their concience and God just made different religions for the help of it; and hen despite not causing terrible things to happen to people, God killed JFK so RFK would be a really great person for the last few years of his life.
As an atheist, I was interested in a Christian giving real evidence towards the existence of God, not just quoting Scripture at me, but there is no real "evidence" here, just some of his ideas about God, a few of which don't seem to be shared by most Christians. I was expecting a much better book from a lawyer. He claims he is providing"evidence" to prove God is real, but it is circumstantial, at best. He has a favorite atheist author he quotes frequently, despite saying many times that most atheists don't share his viewpoint, then uses those quotes to "disprove" atheism. He also has a couple Christian authors he seems to draw most of his "evidence" from, as if an option is the same as a fact. And despite saying he is not going to use Scripture as evidence, there is a ton of that going on too.

[Mark Boydell · Rating 5 out of 5]

Although not beautiful prose, the book is an excellent review of the intellectual case for a faith in Christianity. Beyond the CS Lewis appeal to reason, this grapples more with the new atheist challenges and demonstrates with relative ease that many of these attacks are on strawmen. He also takes on some interesting challenges. It's long but thorough so not just "here's my argument" but a long backwards and forwards from someone who clearly is a fine legal mind.

[Peter · Rating 1 out of 5]

He announces a provocative defense of Christianity and then immediately sets about telling us that faith is the number one thing. Says the leap is the main thing but uses it to sidestep any result of argument or evidence that goes against his pre held conclusion. Use the "leap" as a safety net.

Page 15: "if man knew 100% that god exists for sure then - no fee will, slavish obedience " etc and yet the bible specifically says that god 100% was known to Adam , Moses etc slavish obedience didn't stop apple theft etc.
If man knew 100% that god doesn't exist then tadaa survival of fittest . again, non sequitur, many cultures have different gods or no gods, ( hint read anthropology 101).

still on page 15 : if man knew as much as god then would be co equal. um, no, even if there were a god, simply knowing stuff does not give one magic powers.
Not sure f I can stomach this lightweight apologetic nonsense.

think I might need anti nausea pills, headache tablets and blood pressure pills to survive this, I hope it gets better, but initial impression? - not encouraging.

p18:
"Although that belief is usually held unthinkingly ... it is not irrational " really? comes pretty darn close to actually defining irrational. sweet mother of Artemis , spare me this torture.

He accepts the Big Bang and evolution, age of earth / universe then ( arghh) the size if the sun and moon / relative positions / same size in an eclipse tadaaa miracle . Oh my FSM ( Parmesan be upon him) , how much he doth froth as like unto an imbecile.

P82,tadaa inner voice must be from god because it just is ! Really ?

[Ernest · Rating 3 out of 5]

This thought provoking book outlines the author’s reasons why he believes that God exists and his refutations of objections to religion. As a book to convince others, I am not sure it fully succeeds. Some arguments are highly persuasive, while others are weaker and are less convincing. However, I acknowledge that the persuasiveness of arguments only relates to me; others may find different arguments more or less persuasive, and ultimately, whether it is the individual who must decide for themselves (and not a majority or other set of the population to a certain standard).

This is not the book’s only function. This book serves as an honest account and understanding of the author’s belief in God. That someone has taken the time to try to articulate their belief is to be commended. It is not easy not only to formally organise one’s thoughts, but then to have one’s thoughts published to the world, exposing and inviting criticism. As an honest account of the author’s thoughts and beliefs, it is insightful and interesting.

The author’s states that ‘[if] anything in this book causes just one person to being more closely or more clearly about even one issue [of the Christian God’s existence], then it have served a valuable purpose’. If that is his aim, he more than succeeds.

[Cornelis Haupt · Rating 2 out of 5]

Sincerely and well-written, but ultimately I walk away bored and untouched. I remember at one point loathing this book because I had started loathing the author's worldview. Looking back now I've changed my mind: it's an okay read. It's just not for me.

[Andrew Harten · Rating 4 out of 5]

I did enjoy this book as it offered a few new ways to look at old questions. This book is fairly heavy going, and is not for everyone.