Heh . Well , considering that just two books about the main lines of just Craig ' s formulation of one specific type of Cosmological Argument run ~ 200 pages for the argument itself and another ~ 150 pages for the atheist counterargument , I suppose I should have expected a long process . As for the existing arguments , they ' re a good starting point , but they often stop too soon . On the beauty question , for example it usually takes a long time just for the debaters to get to the point where they ' ve moreorless hammered out that their version of the argument runs something like , The Quran is beautiful , therefore it is a revelation . And then the counterargument goes that beauty is subjective , so it ' s not proof at all . Or the counterargument asks why even the most beautiful art in the world would prove revelation . Or if there ' s a known standard for determining the beauty of Quranic Arabic even if we assume that such a standard might exist . And then the argument goes in circles around these points without digging much deeper into them . If you compare these debates to miracle claims like the Resurrection , which philosophers of religion on both sides have gone over with a finetoothed comb in fact , where atheist and religious philosophers alike have gone to ridiculous extremes like pulling out Bayesian arguments , the premises of the Quran ' s inimitability argument are far less clear .