Dr. Craig is a liar.

[Jehanne]

Because god did not cause mathematical truths to be; they simply are.  God could have created the Cosmos to be different, no?  Different physical constants?  Laws?  Number of planets?  Even us!  But, god could not have caused 2 + 2 to equal anything but 4.  Why not just say that "abstract objects" created the Cosmos:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wb10QvaHpS4

That has got to bet he worst rebuttal I have ever heard. Can you pull out the point you think he made that made sense?

Daniel Dennett, unlike William Craig, is a true philosopher; Craig is an Aristotelian who only sees limited possibilities ("chance", "necessity" or "design") and who is unwilling to ever concede that there could be other possibilities that simply transcend the human imagination.  For Craig, physics is just "common sense" or it must be wrong.  As I posted to you before, Craig could never make sense of a stationary test charge in a lab which has no magnetic field but only an electric field; and yet, an observer moving through the lab would see both a magnetic and an electric field.  For Criag, this is absurd; for how could one observer see no magnetic field yet another observer see a magnetic field.  For Craig, this is an insurmountable contradiction, therefore, the theory (in this case, the Theory of Special Relativity) must be wrong.  "Evidence and theory be damned," if the philosopher says so!

For Craig, Philosophy is the King of all the Sciences, the immutable bar of truth that any and all academic disciplines must submit their findings to, and it is to the philosopher alone that final judgment is to be rendered over the truth claims of anyone or anything.  If the Philosopher says that something does not make sense, well, then it does not make sense.  If you don't believe me in this regard with respect to Craig's narcissistic arrogance, watch this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sKuEbbDi-tQ

Professor Daniel Dennett, on the other hand, being a true philosopher, understands, rightly so, that philosophy must follow Science and not lead it.  Philosophy must be shaped by Science and not try to shape Science, for Science is "knowledge", rooted in evidence.  As the late Carl Sagan said, "A philosopher has no laboratory in which to test his ideas."