Philosotroll.com 2 paragraphs quoted below.
I’d argue that Craig really isn’t all that relevant to contemporary academic philosophy. His primary relevance is to a community of evangelical Christians who are looking to use some philosophical tools in apologetics; he is a sort of public educator on the issue of philosophy for that community. That said, Craig has done some serious work in the academic sub-discipline of philosophy of time, and so he does have some legitimacy that the evangelical community uses to assess his credibility. In this way, Bill Craig is less like Al Plantinga (a former president of the American Philosophical Association) and more like Peter Kreeft. That’s not a jab; that’s an observation as to the role of the individual within the academic and public spheres.
The other part which is not entirely accurate is the notion that we have a significant renaissance in Christian philosophy now. There is certainly some revived interest, but given that the Bourget and Chalmers study suggests that 14.6% of professional philosophers are theists (not “Christians;” theists at all) and 72.8% are atheists, there’s still a general lack of acceptance in the community. I’ve linked to the study above. (Further, it’s fair to say that there is some serious derision surrounding theism in many of the major bastions of serious academic philosophy. Hang out with the tenured folks in those programs long enough, and help them consume enough wine, and you’ll get some stories.) In order to even advance this as a potential contention, the author would have to show something, like an increase in publications arguing for Christianity (which is actually plausible, I don’t know of a study that has looked at that) or something to that effect. Otherwise, the story that is being woven is more than a bit specious.