It seems incredible that after the efforts of so many scholars people have reverted to talking about ‘theism’ which has never existed.

Also forgotten is that the very term ‘philosophy of religion’ seems to imply that philosophy is not of itself inherently religious and can achieve a rational mastery of theology, mythopoesis etc. Plato was not so dim....

‘Philosophical theology’ is really no better. All of theology is a philosophy. Most philosophies have been theologies and have usually recognised sacred texts, oracular revelations etc.

So let’s just follow Jean-Yves Lacoste and dump the theology/philosophy distinction. Today it just holds us back and reduces theology to a regional area, preventing it from being a metaphysics concerning everything.

Nor should we speak of ‘natural theology’. It was invented at the same time as ‘ontology’ and implies that study of God and the soul etc belongs to a ‘special’ not a ‘general’ metaphysics. It subordinates theology to ontology in a Scotist lineage. There’s no nat Theol in Aquinas

Only an initial metaphysics that dimly points to God as cause of Being. We then need revealed theology to elaborate on this, and to revise our initial metaphysics.

Whether even Aquinas has too much duality of metaphysics and sacra doctrina could be debated. For an earlier Boethian scheme metaphysics/theology was as much about God as about Being and as much about revelation as about reason. Today this may be the better way to go.