I recently came across some you tube videos of William Lane Craig, debating various points on the philosophy of religion. I have seen other Christians debating the likes of Christopher Hitchens, and Sam Harris, and professional cosmologist advocates of naturalism. Their arguments against the new militant atheism were adequate, but never captured the essence of the high road of how Christians in the modern world can still authentically believe.
That is not the case with William Lane Craig. He has an exacting mind, and lays out the case for how fully educated, fully scientific Christians can still authentically believe in a world view that has preceded our modern world of science and reductionism. He does not get distracted by all the low roads that the militant atheists lay out for those that they debate, as booby traps.
Which is to say, the reason that Richard Dawkins refuses to debate Craig is that he does not want his butt handed to him in a sling, as has happened to all of his buddies who naively entered into a debate with Craig.
Craig is a cut above the rest, I think.