The claim that Muslims refuse to dispute became Christian dogma

Evidence

His work also claims to have been written in his Muslim prison, to fortify local Christians; and, although he must have taught in the presence of Muslims, sufficiently to annoy the ‘ulama’ and earn his martyrdom, the idea that his primary purpose was to encourage Christians in Islamic territory accords exactly with the character of his arguments. His apostrophes of Muhammad are obviously a rhetorical device. What all his careful comparison of Islamic and Christian sources for Muhammad’s biography amounts to is a reassurance that the traditional Christian views are sound at least in outline. — Norman Daniel, Islam and the West, 1426 (#corroborates, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Islamic refusal to dispute likely stemmed from caution, not fear of reason; Christian-Muslim controversy necessarily centers on their fixed points of doctrinal disagreement; Christian anti-Islamic polemic was a defensive reaction to Muslim power and prestige (+11 more)

Related

• Christian polemics against Muhammad aimed to reassure Christians, not convert Muslims (similarity 0.87)
• Medieval anti-Islamic polemics aimed to fortify Christians rather than convert Muslims (similarity 0.86)
• Medieval Christian polemic invented a silent Muslim opponent who never objected (similarity 0.86)
• Christian-Muslim controversy necessarily centers on their fixed points of doctrinal disagreement (similarity 0.86)
• Muslims’ well-meaning silence in religious debates was often misread by Christians as defeat. (similarity 0.85)
• Christian polemics against Islam argued from premises only Christians accepted (similarity 0.85)
• Christian anti-Islamic polemic targeted Christian readers, not Muslims (similarity 0.84)
• Islamic refusal to dispute likely stemmed from caution, not fear of reason (similarity 0.84)
• Christian polemists preferred their own readings over traditional Islamic interpretation (similarity 0.83)
• Mediaeval anti-Islamic polemics convinced neither Muslims nor Christians (similarity 0.83)
• Medieval Christian polemics against Islam were written for Christian audiences, not Muslims (similarity 0.83)
• Scholarly polemic failed because it never spoke in terms Muslims could recognize (similarity 0.83)
• Medieval Christian polemicists built their case on Muhammad’s alleged self-contradiction (similarity 0.83)
• Medieval Christian-Muslim disputation mostly argued from premises neither side shared (similarity 0.83)
• Religious polemic repels the home audience more than the described adversary (similarity 0.82)

Broader Connections

• Early Christian apologetic dialogues aimed at silencing Muslims, not converting them #corroborates (0.85)
• Christian polemics against Muhammad aimed to reassure Christians, not convert Muslims #corroborates (0.78) — Norman Daniel, Islam and the West, 1426
• Christian-Muslim controversy necessarily centers on their fixed points of doctrinal disagreement #qualifies (0.75)
• Anti-Quran polemics were crafted for Christian audiences rather than actual Muslims #corroborates (0.72)
• Anti-Islamic polemic was shaped to repel Christians, not Muslims #corroborates (0.72) — Norman Daniel, Islam and the West, 1471
• Medieval Christian polemics against Islam were written for Christian audiences, not Muslims #corroborates (0.72) — Norman Daniel, Islam and the West, 1421
• Christian apologists writing in Arabic could concede Islam’s legitimacy while disputing its truth #qualifies (0.72) — John V. Tolan, Saracens, 380
• Medieval anti-Islamic polemics aimed to fortify Christians rather than convert Muslims #corroborates (0.72)
• Christian anti-Islamic polemic was a defensive reaction to Muslim power and prestige #corroborates (0.70)
• The Christian image of Islam served Christian self-understanding, not Islam itself #corroborates (0.70) — Edward W. Said, Orientalism, 165
• Medieval Christian-Muslim disputation mostly argued from premises neither side shared #corroborates (0.70)