Even Lull doubted laypeople could grasp his Trinitarian proofs

Evidence

These questions obsessed him, till he came to think of the relation of Christianity to Islam chiefly in these terms. He took rationalisation of the Trinity further than any other polemist and much further than contemporary schools of theology would allow. — Norman Daniel, Islam and the West, 980 (#complicates, via linked claim)

Merchants, he said, who often did business in Islamic countries, were asked about the Christian religion by Muslims anxious for discussions; out of ignorance they often did not know how to answer and were ‘in doubt about the religion of Muhammad’. Now Lull would dispel this difficulty. He would show them how to demonstrate that the Christian religion is better, greater and truer than any other, by a method, in fact, that was equally efficacious against the Jews. Of course, it was solely concerned with the Trinity. He did indeed make some concessions to the weakness of the laity; he omitted to use symbols for ideas in the course of this argument, which is by so much the easier to follow. … A little doubtful whether the laity were really following, after all (‘indeed the laity are not accustomed to subtleties like this’), he suggested a homely comparison based upon the King of Majorca, who rules there by and through justice, but through whom justice cannot be known if he does not make use of it. It is natural to suppose that there were merchants whom even this comparison would not greatly illuminate. — Norman Daniel, Islam and the West, 990 (#complicates, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Lull taught lay Christian merchants to prove the Trinity to Muslims; Lull pushed rational argument for the Trinity beyond medieval theological limits — Norman Daniel, Islam and the West, 980; Lull expected lay merchants to win theological debates with Muslims using Trinitarian syllogisms — Norman Daniel, Islam and the West, 990 (+1 more)

Related

• Lull taught lay Christian merchants to prove the Trinity to Muslims (similarity 0.96)
• Lull expected lay merchants to win theological debates with Muslims using Trinitarian syllogisms (similarity 0.94)
• Lull equipped lay merchants to argue the Trinity against Muslims and Jews alike (similarity 0.91)
• Lull pushed rational argument for the Trinity beyond medieval theological limits (similarity 0.90)
• Lull argued Muslim monotheism was incomplete, not false, and only the Trinity proved it. (similarity 0.87)
• Lull never sincerely engaged actual Muslim objections to the Trinity (similarity 0.87)
• Rational proofs of the Trinity never convinced informed non-Christian disputants (similarity 0.85)
• Lull argued Islam was incomplete rather than false, implying the Christian creed (similarity 0.83)
• Medieval Lull framed Muslim theological resistance as wilful stupidity (similarity 0.82)
• Llull claimed Christianity provable from theistically shared ground with Muslims (similarity 0.81)
• Lull saw Muslim and Christian fears of misbelief as mirror images (similarity 0.81)
• Lull proposed a syllogistic compromise that both Christians and Muslims refused to follow (similarity 0.81)
• Medieval theologians distinguished rational illustration of the Trinity from rational proof (similarity 0.80)
• Theologians thought proving the Trinity rationally was impossible (similarity 0.80)
• Llull claimed learned Saracens secretly doubted Muhammad’s prophethood. (similarity 0.80)

Broader Connections

• Lull pushed rational argument for the Trinity beyond medieval theological limits #complicates (0.82) — Norman Daniel, Islam and the West, 980
• Lull expected lay merchants to win theological debates with Muslims using Trinitarian syllogisms #complicates (0.78) — Norman Daniel, Islam and the West, 990
• Reason can defend but not prove the Christian faith. #qualifies (0.72)