Aquinas' Brutal Takedown of False Prophet Muhammad
While many Catholics are familiar with St. Thomas Aquinas’ Summa Theologiae—written as a manual of theology for students—the Summa Contra Gentiles is something quite different.
It was written as a work of apologetics, aimed at explaining and defending the Christian faith to non-Christians, especially Muslims and Jews. Because of that, Aquinas relies primarily on reason and philosophy—drawing from Aristotle, Plato, and the Neoplatonists—rather than Scripture, which his intended audience wouldn’t have accepted as authoritative.
Personally, I’ve often found this approach far more enjoyable; the Summa Contra Gentiles feels less like a systematized explanation of the faith and more like a giant, brilliantly argued work of Catholic apologetics.
What follows is his most direct (and not at all politically correct) critique of the origins of Islam.
[Muhammad] seduced the people by promises of carnal pleasure to which the concupiscence of the flesh goads us. His teaching also contained precepts that were in conformity with his promises, and he gave free rein to carnal pleasure. In all this, as is not unexpected, he was obeyed by carnal men. As for proofs of the truth of his doctrine, he brought forward only such as could be grasped by the natural ability of anyone with a very modest wisdom. Indeed, the truths that he taught he mingled with many fables and with doctrines of the greatest falsity. He did not bring forth any signs produced in a supernatural way, which alone fittingly gives witness to divine inspiration; for a visible action that can be only divine reveals an invisibly inspired teacher of truth. On the contrary, Muhammad said that he was sent in the power of his arms—which are signs not lacking even to robbers and tyrants. What is more, no wise men, men trained in things divine and human, believed in him from the beginning, Those who believed in him were brutal men and desert wanderers, utterly ignorant of all divine teaching, through whose numbers Muhammad forced others to become his followers by the violence of his arms. Nor do divine pronouncements on the part of preceding prophets offer him any witness. On the contrary, he perverts almost all the testimonies of the Old and New Testaments by making them into fabrications of his own, as can be. seen by anyone who examines his law. It was, therefore, a shrewd decision on his part to forbid his followers to read the Old and New Testaments, lest these books convict him of falsity. It is thus clear that those who place any faith in his words believe foolishly
SCG 1, 6, 4.
If you’d like to hear one man’s story of leaving Islam, check out this excellent trailer of my upcoming conversation with Ridvan Aydemir, known online as Apostate Prophet:
Watch on Locals now or Youtube next week.