Yes, as you say, it might be intentional. Perhaps, because Rick’s approach is very much in one direction (socratic – with a touch of the iconoclastic?) One problem with the Scholastic is that it, too, is all of a piece: I don’t know of any major scholastic philosopher who doubts (let alone REFUTES) the existence of God! Probably Kierkegaard is the first “christian” philosopher to seek a “re-assessment” of God????

A common feature of every period of “philosophic history” is the “refutation” (or “modification”) of previous ideas: e.g. Descartes – Hume – Kant – Hegel – Nietzsche. This doesn’t really happen in the Mediaeval Period (perhaps because any philosopher questioning Church doctrine was “dead meat”!)