One thing about Rauser is that he's willing to take on atheists, and it seems he has no fear. So he's asking atheists why they don't believe and then he analyses those reasons. Guess what? He finds them all insufficient. See for yourself with three non-believers: 1) Justin Schieber; 2) Counter Apologist; and 3) Edward Babinski. I've already weighed in on what makes for a good reason for non-belief. It's called the "Argument from Ignorance" where I argue there isn't a bad personal reason to reject Christianity (seen in four parts in reverse chronological order). Maybe he'll consider my arguments? So far I don't see him doing so.