Medieval polemicists mocked Muslim textual authority while relying on their own dubious sources

Evidence

Peter asserted that there is nothing about this prophecy in the Q., and nothing in those other books of the Muslims which have less authority. It is stupid, he added, to believe things on doubtful authority, and senseless to believe them on none — remarks that in the circumstances have an unintentional irony. — Norman Daniel, Islam and the West, 1965

Categorization

• XREF: Connects to the broader theme of religious polemic relying on dubious textual authority — similar dynamic to the tahrif/getting-translation debates in this very chapter. — connects to: Mediaeval critics mocked the Qur’an’s chapter names as irrational; Medieval polemicists recycled general accusations of Muslim vice without personal knowledge; Medieval polemicists ignored known facts to fabricate Muslim heretical intent (+1 more)
• DEEPTHINKING: The ‘unintentional irony’ — the polemicist condemns doubtful authority exactly while his own arguments rest on questionable sources — is a rich, layered observation about the self-blindness of religious controversy.