Roy Williams, God, Actually: Why God Probably Exists, Why Jesus Was Probably Divine, and Why the ‘Rational’ Objections to Religion Are Unconvincing (Oxford: Monarch Books, 2009), 384 Pps., $18.95.
Roy Williams practiced law in Australia for nearly 20 years, for many of which he considered himself an atheist. Numerous life experiences as he entered the first few years of his third decade on earth – including becoming a parent, voluminous reading, and a life-threatening illness – caused him, however, to convert to Christianity and later become an advocate for its intellectual cogency (as evident in this title). In this title, Williams draws from examples in science, politics, and the arts – amongst others –seeking answers to the biggest questions regarding the Christian faith by appealing to evidence and reason. Williams approaches this task presuming that the reader knows next-to-nothing about the faith once delivered to the saints (i.e. Christianity). In what follows, we will look at the contents of the title more fully, and perhaps critique some entailments of it.
The title is broken into three parts, the first of which addresses reasons to believe in God; he notes that the physical universe, the human mind, and the apparent design of each, both contribute to a convincing case that an omnipotent creator God exists. Notably, he also herein contends that the characteristics of this God at least include being marked by love. After beginning with the general notion of God and the bountiful reasons for believing in him, he then turns, in part two, to an argument for the reasonableness of believing in Christianity in particular. Williams considers the person of Jesus (with particular reference to his character), and especially his resurrection, to be strong attestations to his divinity (and as a result, the verity of his claims). Part three of this title addresses some common objections to the coherency of Christianity, beginning with suffering, and concluding with the notion of eternal punishment for non-believers; in between, he also addresses politics and other religions.
The strength of Williams’ volume, in my opinion, could also be perceived as its most pronounced weakness; at various times, his lawyer-like argumentation – built upon logical and analytical deduction – could be seen to be congruent with the now widely disregarded natural theology argument: i.e. that one can argue directly from the material world to the necessity of the Christian God as an explanation for it. Much more ‘secure’ and plausible, I think, is an inductive argument from the natural world towards a deity – perhaps alike unto the Christian God – that is at once tentative and dogmatic (admittedly, this is a juxtaposition) in that it is open to revision, refinement, or even reformulation entirely in view of the ongoing discoveries within it. I particularly find an argument in the beginning of this title to be somewhat problematic, and if taken to its logical extreme, could possibly belie the intent of the book as a whole: indeed, while outlining his deductive approach to Christianity in chapter one, Williams notes that the emphasis of any evangelist should be upon the supernatural claims that undergird their faith (29); however, Williams himself functions as an evangelist in this text, taking his cue from the natural world and not from supernatural claims. One could argue then, and I am in fact tempted to do so, that Williams book is written and argued from false premises: although purportedly not a natural theology, it nevertheless is exactly that.
Nevertheless, there are some highly valuable aspects of this title. Refuting the arguments of well-known atheists (e.g. Christopher Hitchens and Richard Dawkins), Williams shows how faith in the (post)modern era could possibly be strengthened by logical deductions from known facts. As such, this title is refreshing.
Bradford McCall
Regent University, Virginia Beach, VA