Ramon Lull argued Islam’s denial of Incarnation dishonors creation itself.

Evidence

Lull used the traditional arguments that we have been considering, chiefly as they could be fitted into his favourite Trinitarian speculation. For example, the dishonour done to Christ’s mother by robbing her Son of His divinity outweighed the possible value of direct praise of her. Muslims’ praise of the humanity of Christ was vitiated in the same way: ‘the Muslims love Your humanity, in that they believe and understand that it was conceived by the Holy Ghost, and in that they believe that Your humanity was in this world without sin; but, Lord, in another way they do not love Your humanity …’ - that is, as united to the Godhead and as the means of salvation. He argued that, by rejection of the Incarnation, creation is honoured less, and, if creation, the Creator; this is an all but Chestertonian argument. — Norman Daniel, Islam and the West, 959

Categorization

• XREF: The ‘all but Chestertonian argument’ connecting rejection of Incarnation to diminished honor of creation echoes G.K. Chesterton’s Orthodoxy insistence that only belief in the supernatural dignifies the natural. — connects to: God creates the very temporality into which the Incarnation enters — Catherine Malabou, The Future of Hegel: Plasticity,…, 866; Kenosis as the Incarnation’s mystery is the supreme expression of Christ’s paradox
• SEED: Potential angle: how Lull’s Trinitarian lens transformed interfaith polemic into speculative theology — an early case of creative theology repurposing missionary argument.