Why do the big names in atheism freeze up when debating William Lane Craig?

I recently watched William Lane Craig's debates with Christopher Hitchens and Sam Harris and in both debates, it was easy to walk away with the feeling that Craig won. Hitchens just kept saying "I haven't heard any convincing evidence..." Without refuting Craig's arguments. Sam Harris did something similar - instead of addressing Craig's arguments, he ignored them for the entire debate. Also, Lawrence Krauss, when debating Craig about A Universe from Nothing, missed an opportunity to counter Craig's (correct) assertion that the primordial soup of the universe is not nothing.

Now, I've heard refutations for Craig's arguments but neither Hitchens, Harris, nor Krauss used them and so it could seem as though they lost their debates with him. Craig even invited Hitchens to become a Christian while onstage, and was justified in asking - given their performances in the debate. Any ideas why they froze up in their debates against him?

I also noticed that Craig got first word in those debates, in which he was able to define the terms used in the debate, giving him an edge.

Finally, why doesn't Dawkins debate Craig?
Load Previous Replies
  • up

    Here ya go, Ang --

    History of the Earth
    • up

      Stuart Ingrouille

      I know what you mean about Hitch and Krauss, but I thought Harris did rather well. I take on pretty much all of Craig's arguments in my book, if you are interested.

      Craig always gets the first word. I wouldn't mind betting it is prerequisite for him agreeing to debate. As you say, he always sets up the parameters and then criticizes those who digress from them. Arrogant.

      Dawkins did debate Craig - in Pueblo, New Mexico.Link

      • up

        David Henson

        I had a great deal of respect for Hitchens, but his knowledge of God is limited to religious tradition, more specifically, of an historic nature. He doesn't know the Bible very well. But then again, the same could be said of Craig. He comes from the religious tradition which has transmogrified the meaning of the Bible. Apostate Christianity.

        I have absolutely no respect for Harris or Dawkins. There is no substance between the two. Krauss I've never heard of.  

        I really don't follow those sorts of debates though, to be honest. Might as well ask the cat or watch the History channel.