Are there post-modern (or liberal/analytic) responses the this, or similar analyses by guys like David Bentley Hart and D.C. Schindler?

I started with post-modernism and sort of worked my way back. These are tightly argued and not the sort of throwaway attacks you see by propagandists in the culture war. I have not come across any POMO responses to this sort of critique though, only to the propagandists and to a lesser extent the analytics. Or is religious philosophy considered safely ignorable because it is religious?

It seems to me that the most serious charge here is that many of the POMOs do poor history of philosophy, and this is also where the traditionalists have a strong claim to expertise. That seems highly relevant though, since dismissals of all past thought are often a sort of grounding, starting point.

>>24517805 (OP)
>John Milbank
I knew him when he was teaching at UVA, I was friends with his son, a turbo-autist named Sebastian who would only eat bread and would run up and down stairs like a gremlin. He was extremely thin due to his poor diet. John Milbank on the other hand was very fat. He had extremely soft hands. It was like shaking hands with a bowl of pudding. His son is now some sort of clickbait journalist. One time the chad of the gifted program fell down a flight of stairs. Sebastian walked up to him and said in his posh accent 'chad chad... hello chad!' and kicked him as hard as he could, then the chad chased him around the school. It was a lol. Those are my Milbank chronicles.

>>24517847
I've seen parallels between Milibank and the theories I espouse

>>24517805 (OP)
I wouldn't say direct but have you checked out John D. Caputo?