​ https://aquinas.cc/la/en/~SCG1.C6.

8
​ Mohammed [...]
1. Enticed peoples with the promise of carnal pleasures, to the desire of which the
concupiscence of the flesh instigates. He also delivered commandments in keeping
with his promises, by giving the reins to carnal pleasure, in which it is easy for carnal
men to obey.
2. Inculcated lessons of truth only such as can be easily known to any man of average
wisdom by his natural powers—in fact, he mingled the truths which he taught with
many fables and most false doctrines.
3. Did not add any signs of supernatural agency, which alone are a fitting witness to
divine inspiration, since a visible work that can only be from God proves the teacher
of truth to be invisibly inspired, but he asserted that he was sent in the power of
arms, which sign is not lacking even to robbers and tyrants.
4. Those who believed in him from the outset were not wise men practiced in things
divine and human, but bestial men who dwelt in the deserts, utterly ignorant of all
divine teaching (this refers to supernatural truths alone), and it was by a multitude of
such men and the force of arms that he compelled others to submit to his law.
5. Lastly, no divine oracles of prophets in a previous age bore witness to him; rather, he
corrupted almost all the teaching of the Old and New Testaments by a narrative
replete with fables, as one may see by a perusal of his law. Hence, by a cunning
device, he did not commit the reading of the Old and New Testament books to his
followers, lest he should thereby be convicted of falsehood.
(Conclusion:) Thus it is evident that those who believe his words believe lightly.
​
Because Muhammad did not have revelation, he could not exhort people to believe in things
which are beyond the grasp of natural reason. Therefore, people were convinced of islam
by truths which are already knowable by natural reason (the oneness of God, etc) and
because of this, it did not require anything supernatural in order to become a muslim. They
were able to easily give credit to Muhammad, because he told them natural truths that the
people of their culture had rejected.

Again: St Thomas is differentiating between natural and supernatural truths; not natural
truths very easily concluded, and natural truths concluded only with difficulty. He is not
calling the early muslims stupid, rather he is observing that they were not initiated into
philosophy.

https://aquinas.cc/la/en/~DeRatio.C2
Here he talks about this clearly:
First of all I wish to warn you that in disputations with unbelievers about articles of the faith,
you should not try to prove the faith by necessary reasons. This would belittle the sublimity
of the faith, whose truth exceeds not only human minds but also those of angels; we believe
in them only because they are revealed by God.
Yet whatever comes from the supreme truth cannot be false, and what is not false cannot
be repudiated by any necessary reason.
Just as our faith cannot be proved by necessary reasons, because it exceeds the human
mind, so because of its truth it cannot be refuted by any necessary reason.
This is the 'divine teaching', the 'signs of supernatural agency', the 'divine oracles of the
prophets' which the muslims are missing.
Here is what he says about how their carnal view of beatitude affects their whole system by
a kind of blindness of the immaterial, since they were not taught these sublime,
supernatural truths that exceed what can be known by natural reason (which is
concept-formation by abstraction from what is gained from the senses):

https://aquinas.cc/la/en/~DeRatio.C3.2
Muslims are silly in ridiculing us for holding that Christ is the Son of the living God, as if God
had a wife. Since they are carnal, they can think only of what is flesh and blood.
https://aquinas.cc/la/en/~DeRatio.C5.2
A similar blindness makes Muslims ridicule the Christian Faith by which we profess that the
Son of God died, since they do not understand the depth of such a great mystery.

St Thomas is saying that muslims have not been revealed any supernatural fulfillment of
human nature clearly. Since they think that the fulfillment of even man's natural faculties is
necessarily partly carnal, they take on a kind of strange rationalism, which rejects that there
can be any possible knowledge in men which is beyond that which is knowable by reason.
And he is right - even though muslims accept that there are truths God knows about himself
which we cannot know by natural reason, they say that we can only affirm that this
knowledge is true, and not gain any kind of penetration of it.

The muslims think:

P1. in christianity, God generating a son is 'producing another being from himself'.
P2. But this is something that God would need a wife to do.
C. But God does not and cannot have a wife. Therefore he cannot produce a son.

Keep in mind: This is about the trinitarian processions, it has nothing to do with the
incarnation. Earlier muslims knew that the trinity is a separate doctrine to the incarnation -
that is, they knew that we believe that Jesus pre-exists his incarnation.
The issue from the beginning (which st thomas clarifies) is that they don't understand that
we believe that the Son is not another being from the Father.

St Thomas does not say that this reasoning is wrong. We grant P2. It is not possible for a
personal being to generate another of his own nature without another for him to unify
himself with, and this is only possible if there is a material component to the personal being.
We are not talking about the eternal procession of the Son within the Godhead... They think
we are talking about God creating another being with its own divine nature. That would
mean that God can make polytheism true, which is heretical and impossible. The divine
nature is necessarily absolutely singular and alone. This is a vital truth and muslims are
correct to be disgusted and think us to be ridiculous, because they think that we reject it.

https://aquinas.cc/la/en/~DeRatio.C3
How Generation Applies to God.
[...]
Observe that the mode of generation is not the same for everything, but generation applies
to each thing according to the special manner of its nature. In animals it is by copulation of
male and female; in plants it is by pollination or generation, and in other things in other
ways. Generation should be understood of God as it applies to an intellectual nature. Even
though our own intellect falls far short of the divine intellect, we still have to speak of the
divine intellect by comparing it with what we find in our own intellect.
[...]
Whenever it actually understands it forms something intelligible, a kind of offspring, which is
called a concept, something conceived by the mind. [...] A concept of our mind is not the
very essence of our mind, but something accidental to it, because even our act of
understanding is not the very being of our intellect; otherwise our intellect would have to be
always in act. So the word of our intellect can be likened to a concept or offspring,
especially when the intellect understands itself and the concept is a likeness of the intellect
coming from its intellectual power, just as a son has a likeness to his father, from whose
generative power he comes forth.
The word of our intellect is not properly an offspring or son, because it is not of the same
nature as our intellect. Not everything that comes forth from another, even if it is similar to
its source, is called a son; [...] to be a son, it is required that the one coming forth from the
other must not only resemble its source but also be of the same nature with it.
But in God understanding is not different from his being. Consequently the word which is
conceived in his intellect is not something accidental to him or alien from his nature but, by
the very fact that it is a word, it must be coming forth from another and must be a likeness of
its source. All this is true even of our own word. But besides this, the word of God is not an
accident or a part of God, who is simple, nor something extrinsic to the divine nature, but is
something complete, subsisting in the divine nature and coming forth from another, as any
word must be.
In our human way of talking, this is called a son, because it comes forth from another in its
likeness and subsists in the same nature with it. Therefore, as far as divine things can be
represented by human words, we call the word of the divine intellect the Son of God, while
God, whose word he is, we call the Father. We say that the coming forth of the word is an
immaterial generation of a Son, not a carnal one, as carnal men surmise.
[...]
Another difference of our word from the divine is that our intellect does not simultaneously
understand everything, or with one act, but by many different acts; therefore the words of
our intellect are many. But God understands everything simultaneously by one single act,
because his understanding must be one, since it is his very being. It follows therefore that in
God there is only one Word.
​
The point St Thomas is making is this:

The muslims, because they never read the New Testament (See point 5 at the beginning)
are unable to actually gather and understand precisely what is the idea of the eternal
generation of the Son. This is not because they are stupid, it's because nobody ever
clarified it to them. The christians of the middle east were heretics, who actually implied that
something like the muslim error about christianity was correct (e.g. the EOs, the OOs).
Because of this, they think that we are professing that, before god made anything else, he
created another god.

The muslims then, rightly, declare that this is impossible - for a personal being to generate
another personal being, he needs a second personal being, and one with the apparatus of
joining with himself by the conjoining of the natures. But this is only possible when there is
material to be conjoined. Now the angels do not have material bodies; so they cannot
breed. Man is the only personal being capable of such a thing - God is immaterial, and so
he cannot do this either.

But we do not believe that God is generating another personal being from his nature!
Rather, one and the same personal being, eternally generates his own self-understanding,
and because he understands himself perfectly, this Self-Word is something complete,
subsisting in the same divine nature as the Self-Knower. And this is why we say that the
Son is a person, but not another being, nor another particular of a universal divine nature.

​ So let's revisit this.

1. In a particular muslim, the conception of human fulfillment must be purified. First, he
must be shown that the highest human fulfilments come not in the possession of all
manner of pleasures, but in the fulfilment of man's highest part - his intellectual
nature. This is what the philosophers realised: https://aquinas.cc/la/en/~SCG1.C5.3
the philosophers, to wean men from sensible pleasures to virtue, took care to show
that there are other goods of greater account than those which appeal to the senses,
the taste of which things affords much greater delight to those who devote
themselves to active or contemplative virtues.

2. The various truths taught in Islam must be reaffirmed and used as a means of
approach to the muslim. The various fables and other false doctrines, which are
disprovable as necessarily false (such as the good angels Haaruut and Maaruut
teaching sins to men (Quran 2:102), or the uptake of the Alexander Odyssey - a
fictional work - as true history in the story of Dhulqarnayn
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theories_about_Alexander_the_Great_in_the_Quran )
 can prove that the inspired character of the Qur'an, and therefore the authenticity of
Muhammad's prophethood, are doubtworthy. Wherever the truths taught by Islam
entail the falsehood of the errors taught by Islam, this is especially true; these
demonstrate internal incoherence.

3. The signs of supernatural agency in the life of the Church, principally in the works of
grace in those men who receive the sacraments while well disposed toward it (add to
these the verifiable special miracles in the Church), are alone a fitting witness to
divine inspiration. These provide motives of credibility in the true religion.
​ Theories about Alexander the Great in the Quran

4. The muslims must be exposed to clarifications of the divine teaching to which they
have been kept under the hold of misconceptions from the beginning, such as the
true meaning of the eternal generation of the Son, and others. These divine
teachings are those which the Apostles - whom the Qur'an calls 'helpers of God'
(ansarullah) - spread to their followers. The followers of the Apostles among the
Jews, who believed the true religion, were said by the Qur'an to have been made
dhaahir (visibly predominant) among the Jews ( Quran 61:14). By the time that this
predominance among the Jews was achieved, the followers of the Apostles were
already visibly Catholic, accepting the Pauline epistles in their canon, practicing
baptism, and practicing eucharistic worship. It is necessary, then, that the divine
teaching (that is; those teachings which are known by the authority of revelation
alone) is clarified in its truly intended meaning and its coherence defended. To this
end, good relations with Muslims must be pursued, or else the discussions within
which such clarifications are able to happen, are never able to occur - not to mention
the fact that those various truths taught in Islam also touch on matters of social
justice and the development of the common good and that the Church exhorts us to
cooperation with them in these things, which is impossible without such good
relations.

5. The divine oracles of the prophets of previous ages must be historically

authenticated; that the islamic versions of the sacred histories are corrupted with
fables (e.g. Ezekiel/Khidr being born before, and surviving to the time of, Moses)
must be confirmed, and that the prophecies of Christ throughout the texts of the
Jews truly point toward him, and not toward Muhammad, must be made abundantly
clear to the muslim. It is because of the lack of study and arguments in favour of the
authority and use of the Old and New Testaments among the Muslims that the
clearest arguments from authority against them are not able to stand; one cannot
take the later medieval revisionist attempt to save Islam from this death in the
doctrine that the Bible was corrupted so that the proofs of Islam within it were
removed and various un-Islamic doctrines added - because the Qur'an says,
 representing the early and authentic Islamic doctrine that “They will find it [the
previous scriptures] available to them/among them ('indahum),” (Quran 7:157)
showing that in Muhammad's time the texts that the Christians had were authentic.
But the texts in use at the time were already the Peshitta, the LXX and the Vulgate;
and these are the texts we use today. Therefore this objection cannot stand.

Conclusion:
It is evident that while today's religious muslims hold to the Islamic creeds less lightly than
were the words of Muhammad adhered to by his first followers - owing to the multiplication
of traditions, spiritual technologies, pious figures, and philosophical ingenuity - none of
these reasons can stand upon proper interrogation.
The natural truths which Muhammad taught and which were rightly seen to be beautiful and
liberating by his first followers are now able to be clearly seen as easily demonstrated by
reason alone; conversely, each of his various fables are now easily demonstrated to be
either probably or necessarily false.
It is now much easier for the carnalised Muslim conception of the state of beatitude to be
purified both as to its natural and supernatural truth, by the vindication of the Qur'anic
maxim (13:28): "Unquestionably, by the remembrance of Allāh alone do hearts find their
satisfaction," against the entailments of other, false Islamic claims that it is necessary that
men in heaven continue in various fleshly pleasures to be satisfied - that the remembrance
of God by the heart is insufficient, thus confirming the incoherence of Islam.
Lastly, the false doctrines of the heretics have already been crushed by our predecessors;
the victory of the Latins over all contenders has been made apparent, the byzantines
defeated in the lowest place (Quran 30:2-3). Our commonality with the Muslims in rightly
condemning all those labouring in the sickness of doctrines transmitted by schismatic
forefathers - schismatics who would dare to utter the filth that God has created another
being like himself, or to say anything which smacks of such disgusting nonsense, gives us
way to show them that it is we who preserve the foremost doctrine of divine religion:

https://aquinas.cc/la/en/~Credo.A1
Among all the truths which the faithful must believe, this is the first, that there is one God.
[...]
We believe that God who rules and regulates all things is but one God. [...]
There are four motives which have led men to believe in a number of gods.
For dull men, not capable of going beyond sensible things, did not believe anything existed
except physical bodies. Hence, they held that the world is disposed and ruled by those
bodies which to them seemed most beautiful and most valuable in this world. And,
accordingly, to things such as the sun, the moon and the stars, they attributed and gave a
divine worship. [...]
The second motive came from human adulation. Some men, wishing to fawn upon kings
and rulers, obey and subject themselves to them and show them honor which is due to God
alone. [...]
The third motive came from human affection for sons and relatives. Some, because of the
excessive love which they had for their family, caused statues of them to be erected after
their death, and gradually a divine honor was attached to these statues. [...]
The fourth motive is from the malice of the devil. The devil wished from the beginning to be
equal to God [...].
Although all this is terrible to contemplate, yet at times there are any who fall into these
above-mentioned four causes. Not by their words and hearts, but by their actions, they show
that they believe in many gods.
Thus, those (1) who believe that the celestial bodies influence the will of man and regulate their
affairs by astrology, really make the heavenly bodies gods, and subject themselves to them. [...]
In the same category are all those (2) who obey temporal rulers more than God, in that which
they ought not; such actually set these up as gods. [...]
So also those (3) who love their sons and kinsfolk more than God show by their actions that
they believe in many gods; as likewise do those who love food more than God [...].
Moreover, all who (4) take part in magic or in incantations believe that the demons are gods,
because they seek from the devil that which God alone can give [...].

But it remains for the muslims to be shown by us that it is they, and not us who:

(1) Augur the truths of men's fate by the heavenly bodies due to their fables such as the doctrine
of the Night of Power and other absurdities as to make a mockery of the sovereignty of God
over the repentance and sanctification of souls, contrary to the Qur'anic and Biblical maxim, "He
forgives who he wills and punishes who he wills," (Quran 2:282; 3:129; 5:40; 6:39; 14:4; 16:93;
17:54; 29:21; 48:14 etc - Ex 33:19; Romans 9:15.) Who obey their temporal rulers more than
God, for their early Caliphs had revised the law of Muhammad by their own prerogative
(https://sunnah.com/mishkat:1301), among other absurdities.

(2) Love the objects of their emotional and sensory desires as partners with God, as if clear from
their claims of the retention of the pleasures of marriage, intercourse (Quran 13:23; 36:56; 43:7
etc), food and drink in heaven (Quran 52:22; 54:54; 56:22, 27-28; 76:14; 77:42-43 etc). Repeat
formulae after the manner of incantations, with the belief that they will bring about effects
beyond the spiritual effects of meditation upon an intelligible text (as shown by the phenomenon
of the Muqatta'at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muqattaʿat, etc
https://islamqa.info/en/answers/150633/will-he-be-rewarded-for-listening-to-the-quraan-without-
understanding-it )

https://aquinas.cc/la/en/~Credo.S1.18
We must, therefore, believe that there is but one God.
It has been shown that we must first of all believe there is but one God.

Consequently, it is now easy to render Islam as a creed believed in lightly by even its most
fervent adherents - if only we ensure to the best of our ability that they have the opportunity to
listen, and are willing to do so. “If anyone has ears to hear, let him hear.” (Mark 4:23)