Richard Dawkins: Either a Fool or a Coward?

Tim Stanley says "Dawkins has run away from a debate
he probably couldn't win."

This week Richard Dawkins published an article on why he won't debate Bill. Dawkins begins his "Why I Refuse to Debate with William Lane Craig" by writing that "Craig parades himself as a philosopher." When I read this I knew I was reading something written by Dawkins, since he is the king of ad hominem attacks. To correct this: Bill Craig is a philosopher, and a brilliant one. He is a major figure in the area of philosophy of religion. And, e.g., atheist philosopher Quentin Smith has called Bill one of our major scholars regarding the philosophy of time.

But mostly it is a waste of time defending against ad hominem abusives, and that's what one wants to do when reading Richard Dawkins on philosophy and religion.
Oxford University professor Tim Stanley has responded to Dawkins's refusal to debate Bill with an article in The Telegraph: "Richard Dawkins is either a fool or a coward for refusing to debate William Lane Craig."

Bill is now in Oxford presenting his views on God's existence, and refuting Dawkins's arguments in his The God Delusion.