This PDF download is written by Dr. William Lane Craig.
The first section lays out “The Cosmological Argument from Contingency” and concludes:
So what does [Richard] Dawkins have to say in response to this argument? Nothing! Just look at pages 77–78 of his book where you’d expect this argument to come up. All you’ll find is a brief discussion of some watered down versions of Thomas Aquinas’ arguments, but nothing about the argument from contingency. This is quite remarkable since the argument from contingency is one of the most famous arguments for God’s existence and is defended today by philosophers such as Alexander Pruss, Timothy O’Connor, Stephen Davis, Robert Koons, and Richard Swinburne, to name a few.
Just imagine if a Christian wrote a book criticizing biology without interacting with arguments from the leading biologists. I hope no Christian wold be that dishonest in their scholarship.
A couple of other snippets:
The Kalam Cosmological Argument re Dawkins
Now, fortunately, Dawkins does address this version of the cosmological argument. Remarkably, however, he doesn’t dispute either premise of the argument! Instead, he questions the theological significance of the argument’s conclusion.
The ontological argument response re Dawkins:
Dawkins devotes six full pages, brimming with ridicule and invective, to the ontological argument, without raising any serious objection to Plantinga’s argument. He notes in passing Immanuel Kant’s objection that existence is not a perfection; but since Plantinga’s argument doesn’t presuppose that it is, we can leave that irrelevance aside. He reiterates a parody of the argument designed to show that God does not exist because a God “who created everything while not existing” is greater than one who exists and creates everything.47 Ironically, this parody, far from undermining the ontological argument, actually reinforces it.
H/T to The Gospel Coalition.