A while back, atheist philosopher Keith Parsons had a lengthy exchange with Thomist Ed Feser. But Parsons is still an atheist!
Atheists like Parsons don't really are about the mere theism or classical theism of people like Feser. Parsons had a Christian upbringing, and that's his frame of reference.
In a sense he's right. Christianity is a Bible-based religion. You can't just pole-vault over that to classical theism. Classical theism is about the attributes of God rather than the acts of God (other than God as Creator). It's a common denominator view of God shared by some Christians, Muslims, and Jews (e.g. Aquinas, Maimonides, Al-Ghazâlî).
In the nature of the case, it doesn't include the acts of God (beyond creation), because Christians, Muslims, and Jews differ on what God has done in human history. Christians agree with Jews regarding OT history, but Jews disagree with Christians regarding NT history. Both Jews and Christians disagree with Muslims regarding Koranic history, and Muslims return the favor.
By the same token, you have many Christian apologists who defend particular events in Scripture rather than defending Scripture itself.
These approaches are naturally unsatisfactory to many atheists because it's too abstract. At some point the debate has to touch ground. Come down to the level of the God depicted in the Bible. What he does as well as what he is.