Dr. Craig is a liar.

[SteveII]

I understand this part.  I don't see anything about it not to understand.  Three points, though:

A- I have no reason to believe it is true.
 
B- I believe it is contrary to the current scientific consensus

C- It seems to me arbitrary and self-serving, as if the worshipper of, say, a blue devil, proclaimed that everything that isn't blue has a cause.   

We can still look at whether your argument is valid, but it already doesn't seem to be sound.

A. 
1. Something does not come from nothing. 
2. If something can come from nothing, how come we do not see that happening now? Since nothing has no properties, there cannot be any difference between nothing before the universe and nothing now. Our physical laws cannot constrain nothing--because there is nothing to constrain.
3. All of our experiences are 100% in support of this statement. science is based on it. You would have to present a pretty good reason why we should ignore our experience and intuition when it becomes inconvenient for your theory.
B. How can there be a consensus when we don't understand enough about quantum mechanics and can't come up with a unified theory of gravity? Since none of them can be correct, which theory do you want to say indicates that things can exist uncaused? 
C. I would say that we have a strong warrant to believing premise 1 is true (see A and B)