The Terms Mohammedanism and Mohammedans

[Peter]

As much as Muslims wish it weren't the case, the terms Mohammedan and Mohammedanism are the most descriptive terms, for the followers of Mohammed.

It has been suggested that I am an ignoramus for using the term, but those of us that understand Islam, particularly from a Christian perspective being the perfect opposite of the Gospel, see it as another way to emphasize the isolation of those that follow Mohammed's STAND-ALONE 7th century religion, from what Mohammed himself referred to as the "people of the book" - or those he wished his "Allah"s curse on.

It certainly works by my spell check and if my "ignorance" puts me in the ranks of those such as Sir Winston Churchill then I certainly don't have any problem with that.

MOHAMMEDans follow MOHAMMED, and Mohammed's laws.
Muhammad called his followers "followers of Muhammad".
CHRISTians follow Jesus CHRIST, as revealed through ALL of the prophets and witnesses of the 1600 year record of God to mankind, as the new covenant fulfillment of the old covenant law.

Obama sent the bust of Winston Churchill back to England without explanation, that had been warmly received by a  prior president as representing the strong bond between our two free nations. Perhaps after Obama's failed performance in office the bust will be offered back to the next person to occupy the oval office, once again to open arms. Though at the rate things are going England is heading toward being just another Islamist, female genital mutilating, wife beating, slave state.

"How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live... The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property, either as a child, a wife, or a concubine, must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men. Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities... but the influence of the religion paralyzes the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa... and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science, the science against which it had vainly struggled, the civilization of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilization of ancient Rome." - by Sir Winston Churchill - The River War, Vol. II, pp. 248-50, London; Longman, Green & Co., 1899

Very prophetic words as we watched the church die in England over the last century with the vacuum being filled by the rise of Mohammedanism.

"...and take your wives as war booty..."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V22qDQqMPL0

[Peter]

PMd note from a concerned forum brother.

Hi Peter - I have begun a thorough reading of "Islam Reviewed, and have also been following several of your threads, especially those of your conversing with  Mujaheed. I came across a paragraph about the use of the words, "Muhammadanism", and "Muhammadan", and I thought you might ought to take a look at it. Here's the paragraph:

Islam (A Brief Historical Background)

Since many western nations have a distorted or vague knowledge of
Islam, it is essential to give a brief historical background of this political
entity that is also a religion.

Islam literally means submission. Consequently a true Muslim is one
who submits. Islam is not Muhammadanism nor are Muslims Muham-
madans. Such terms are a misnomer and offensive to Muslims. Islam
revolves around a central figure called Muhammad, but that does not
mean the religion is built around or on Muhammad. According to
Muslims he was only an instrument of Allah." (You will find this on page 79)

I did not desire to reveal this to you publicly, so as not to cause you any embarrassment in front of anyone else.

Shalom.  - Mike

[Peter]

Hi Peter - I have begun a thorough reading of "Islam Reviewed, and have also been following several of your threads, especially those of your conversing with  Mujaheed. I came across a paragraph about the use of the words, "Muhammadanism", and "Muhammadan", and I thought you might ought to take a look at it. Here's the paragraph:

Islam (A Brief Historical Background)

Since many western nations have a distorted or vague knowledge of
Islam, it is essential to give a brief historical background of this political
entity that is also a religion.

Islam literally means submission.

And from a Christian perspective there can be no doubt as to just who they are submitted to.

Surah 4:157  That THEY SAID (in boast), "WE KILLED CHRIST JESUS the son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah";- BUT THEY KILLED HIM NOT, NOR CRUCIFIED HIM, but so it was made to appear to them, and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge, but only conjecture to follow, FOR OF A SURETY THEY KILLED HIM NOT:-

Consequently a true Muslim is one
who submits. Islam is not Muhammadanism nor are Muslims Muham-
madans. Such terms are a misnomer and offensive to Muslims.

Declaring that Jesus Christ died on the cross is offensive to Muslims too. Does that mean we avoid the subject?
I use this alternate term for Muslims as a way to help them understand WHO they are submitted to. The more they demonstrate their submission to Mohammed, the more I use the term to help them understand their isolation, in Mohammed's 7th century religion.
Satan has deceived them into believing they are submitted to YHWH, but you and I know that at best they are submitted to Mohammed.

Islam
revolves around a central figure called Muhammad, but that does not
mean the religion is built around or on Muhammad.

But the fact of the matter that is EXACTLY what it is built around. Including his adopted, and then adapted, pagan Arabian moon, sun, star and jinn demon worship rituals.

According to
Muslims he was only an instrument of Allah."

Even Mohammed admitted that he thought it was a jinn-demon that met him in that cave.
It is obvious from a Christian perspective that he was an instrument of Satan.

(You will find this on page 79)

I did not desire to reveal this to you publicly, so as not to cause you any embarrassment in front of anyone else.

Shalom.  - Mike

Thanks for your concern Mike, but any embarrassment suffered should be that suffered by Mohammed's followers. Particularly when they engage in his adopted, and then adapted, Arabian moon, sun, star and jinn-demon worship rituals.
http://www.petewaldo.com/hajj_umrah.htm

[Mike S]

Hi Peter - I have begun a thorough reading of "Islam Reviewed, and have also been following several of your threads, especially those of your conversing with  Mujaheed. I came across a paragraph about the use of the words, "Muhammadanism", and "Muhammadan", and I thought you might ought to take a look at it. Here's the paragraph:

Islam (A Brief Historical Background)

Since many western nations have a distorted or vague knowledge of
Islam, it is essential to give a brief historical background of this political
entity that is also a religion.

Islam literally means submission.

And from a Christian perspective there can be no doubt as to just who they are submitted to.

Surah 4:157  That THEY SAID (in boast), "WE KILLED CHRIST JESUS the son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah";- BUT THEY KILLED HIM NOT, NOR CRUCIFIED HIM, but so it was made to appear to them, and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge, but only conjecture to follow, FOR OF A SURETY THEY KILLED HIM NOT:-

Consequently a true Muslim is one
who submits. Islam is not Muhammadanism nor are Muslims Muham-
madans. Such terms are a misnomer and offensive to Muslims.

Declaring that Jesus Christ died on the cross is offensive to Muslims too. Does that mean we avoid the subject?
I use this alternate term for Muslims as a way to help them understand WHO they are submitted to. The more they demonstrate their submission to Mohammed, the more I use the term to help them understand their isolation, in Mohammed's 7th century religion.
Satan has deceived them into believing they are submitted to YHWH, but you and I know that at best they are submitted to Mohammed.

Islam
revolves around a central figure called Muhammad, but that does not
mean the religion is built around or on Muhammad.

But the fact of the matter that is EXACTLY what it is built around. Including his adopted, and then adapted, pagan Arabian moon, sun, star and jinn demon worship rituals.

According to
Muslims he was only an instrument of Allah."

But even Mohammed's admitted that he thought it was a jinn-demon that met him in that cave.
It is obvious from a Christian perspective that he was an instrument of Satan.

(You will find this on page 79)

I did not desire to reveal this to you publicly, so as not to cause you any embarrassment in front of anyone else.

Shalom.  - Mike

Thanks for your concern Mike, but any embarrassment suffered should be that suffered by Mohammed's followers. Particularly when they engage in his adopted, and then adapted, Arabian moon, sun, star and jinn-demon worship rituals.
http://www.petewaldo.com/hajj_umrah.htm

So I take it you disagree with M. Ali in this matter. Your right to do so, of course.

For readers who have not yet seen the book the above paragraph is from, here is the link to the online version of Islam Reviewed
It is also downloadable free of charge in pdf format here

[Peter]

So I take it you disagree with M. Ali in this matter. Your right to do so, of course.

What part did I disagree with?

[resistingrexmundi]

So I take it you disagree with M. Ali in this matter. Your right to do so, of course.

What part did I disagree with?

I think the point he is making is that M. Ali specifically avoided using the term Muhammadan because it is considered offensive and you do not avoid it. You use it to drive a point home but M. Ali prefers not to address them this way. But while you and Ali may agree that Islam is not of God and while it may center around Muhammad you disagree with Ali over whether Muhammadan should be used as a term for muslims.

[Peter]

So I take it you disagree with M. Ali in this matter. Your right to do so, of course.

What part did I disagree with?

I think the point he is making is that M. Ali specifically avoided using the term Muhammadan because it is considered offensive and you do not avoid it. You use it to drive a point home but M. Ali prefers not to address them this way. But while you and Ali may agree that Islam is not of God and while it may center around Muhammad you disagree with Ali over whether Muhammadan should be used as a term for muslims.

And I usually reserve the use of the term until I am deep into chats with Mohammed's followers and they have spewed increasing blasphemy. However I have increasingly used "Mohammed's followers" as a substitute. They can't deny it, nor can they hardly claim offense at it, even though it also effectively illustrates their isolation.

[Mike S]

So I take it you disagree with M. Ali in this matter. Your right to do so, of course.

What part did I disagree with?

I think the point he is making is that M. Ali specifically avoided using the term Muhammadan because it is considered offensive and you do not avoid it. You use it to drive a point home but M. Ali prefers not to address them this way. But while you and Ali may agree that Islam is not of God and while it may center around Muhammad you disagree with Ali over whether Muhammadan should be used as a term for muslims.

Bingo!  

My two cents on ministry to others:  When I am dealing with the subject matter of Christ and the Bible in my conversations with non-Christians, the subject itself is offensive enough to them (The Bible says so itself) without my adding anything that might cause more offense to the point that they will not listen to me. I want the Holy Spirit to do the work, and I need to get out of the way!

[resistingrexmundi]

So I take it you disagree with M. Ali in this matter. Your right to do so, of course.

What part did I disagree with?

I think the point he is making is that M. Ali specifically avoided using the term Muhammadan because it is considered offensive and you do not avoid it. You use it to drive a point home but M. Ali prefers not to address them this way. But while you and Ali may agree that Islam is not of God and while it may center around Muhammad you disagree with Ali over whether Muhammadan should be used as a term for muslims.

Bingo!  

My two cents on ministry to others:  When I am dealing with the subject matter of Christ and the Bible in my conversations with non-Christians, the subject itself is offensive enough to them (The Bible says so itself) without my adding anything that might cause more offense to the point that they will not listen to me. I want the Holy Spirit to do the work, and I need to get out of the way!

The issue specifically with dealing with the muslims that we run into usually will get "offended" at anything. Much more to the point as Peter pointed out the term is generally reserved for the more beligerent ones anyway and it isn't as if they can honestly argue against the term.

[Peter]

The issue specifically with dealing with the muslims that we run into usually will get "offended" at anything. Much more to the point as Peter pointed out the term is generally reserved for the more beligerent ones anyway and it isn't as if they can honestly argue against the term.

Let alone that YouTube and internet Muslims are a breed unto themselves.
We can see the effectiveness of the term and the isolation it creates, working in this forum, when they invariably argue against the term.
That's when I have the opportunity to explain it in terms like.

MOHAMMEDans follow MOHAMMED, and Mohammed's laws (like their holy day on Friday).
CHRISTians follow Jesus CHRIST as the new covenant fulfillment of the old covenant law.
http://islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=877.msg8771#msg8771
http://islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=64.msg165#msg165

I think it's a good tool, as final food for thought, in conversations that you believe are about to draw to a close. Few things are more important than explaining to them that Mohammed's is a stand-alone religion. This is just one way of isolating them. The most important way, of course, is showing them that Mohammed taught the exact opposite of the Gospel. Pointing out to them that they have only been deceived into believing they are submitted to God.

Are the terms "misnomers"? In my opinion they remain the most descriptive terms for Mohammed's followers and religion.

[Peter]

http://www.answering-islam.org/Index/M/mohammedan.html

MOHAMMEDAN
MOHAMMEDANISM

are older terms for MUSLIM and ISLAM used in many publications up to the middle of the twentieth century.

Occasionally Muslims are upset about these terms because of the wrong impression that Mohammedan means "somebody who worships Mohammed" as a Christian is "somebody who worships Christ".

This is however a misunderstanding, and just as the word Christian means "one who is a follower of the Christ", so did the word Mohammedan signify a person who follows the message and example of Mohammed.

Muhammad himself addressed the Muslims (sometimes) as "followers of Muhammad":

    Narrated 'Aisha : ... The Prophet then said, "O followers of Muhammad! By Allah! There is none who has more ghaira (self-respect) than Allah as He has forbidden that His slaves, male or female commit adultery. O followers of Muhammad! By Allah! If you knew that which I know you would laugh little and weep much." (Sahih Bukhari 2.154)

The term is actually even used by Muslims. Hughes' Dictionary of Islam, published 1886, states:

    MUHAMMADAN. Arabic Muhammadi. A name seldom used in Muhammadan works for the followers of Muhammad, who call themselves either Mu'mins, Muslims, or Musalmans. It is, however, sometimes used in Indian papers and other popular publications, and it is not, as many European scholars suppose, an offensive term to Muslims.

This is even confirmed by a recent Muslim (online) publication, elaborating on "the greatness of al-Haqiqa al-Muhammadiyya, the ‘Muhammadan Reality’" (Source).

Dictionary entries from the Hypertext Webster Gateway:

From Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913) (web1913)

Mohammedan \Mo*ham"med*an\, a. [From Mohammed, fr. Ar. muh['a]mmad praiseworthy, highly praised.] Of or pertaining to Mohammed, or the religion and institutions founded by Mohammed. [Written also {Mahometan}, {Mahomedan}, {Muhammadan}, etc.]

From WordNet (r) 1.6 (wn)

Muhammadan adj : of or relating to the Arabian prophet Muhammad or to the religion he founded [syn: {Muhammadan}, {Mohammedan}] n : a believer or follower of Islam [syn: {Muslim}, {Moslem}, {Mohammedan}, {Muhammedan}, {Muhammadan}]

Although there is nothing disparaging or wrong in those terms, and they were not ment to be insulting, they are outdated. It should be a matter of common courtesy to use the words Muslim for the believer and Islam for the religion since those are the terms used by the Muslims themselves.

However, there are situations in which those terms are still useful. Though the dictionary meaning of "Islam" and "Muslim" are simply "submission" and "one who submits", many Muslims when asked for the meaning of these words reply with "submission to God" and "one who is in submission to God". However, Jews and Christians also understand themselves as being in submission to God (in obedience to those scriptures that they accept as God's true revelation). Therefore, they do not want to accept the term "non-Muslim" for themselves with its obvious connotations as refering to those who are not in submission to God.

If some religous group decides to call itself "the honest" what would all those be who do not agree with their teaching and oppose this group? The choice of names can be a clever trick to put oneself into a position of having a superior claim to integrity and "being right" even before the claims and teachings of the religion in question are evaluated for their truth.

For this reason some prefer "Mohammedan" as a more neutral term for the purpose of refering to those who follow the life and teachings of Muhammad, leaving open whether they are from God or not. However, those who want to use it, should carefully explain the meaning and their reason for the choice of this term because of the common misunderstanding as insult which term carries with many Muslims.

See also this more detailed discussion of the term MUHAMMADANISM.

[Peter]

http://www.muhammadanism.org/Inquiries/Islam/muhammadanism.htm

Muhammadanism — The Term

Muslim: Christians should not use the word, Muhammadanism, because Muslims don't worship Muhammad.

Response: This is an unfounded objection, because the term, Muhammadanism, does not imply that Muslims worship Muhammad. To insist this must be the meaning indicates a poor understanding of the English language. An -ism refers to a doctrine, conduct, or system of thought; it does not imply divine worship. Muhammadanism simply refers to the doctrine, conduct, and system of thought that were taught by Muhammad.

    ism (iz'em) n. [< fol.] a doctrine, theory, system, etc., especially one whose name ends in -ism
    -ism (iz'em) [ME -isme <OFr & L -isma (< Gr) & -ismus (<Gr -ismos): orig. suffix of action or of state, forming nouns from verbs in L -izare, Gr -izein] suffix forming nouns 1 the act, practice, or result of [terrorism] 2 the condition of being [pauperism] 3 action, conduct, or qualities characteristic of [patriotism] 4 the doctrine, school, theory, or principle of [cubism, socialism] 5 devotion to [nationalism] 6 an instance, example, or peculiarity of [Gallicism, witticism]  7 an abnormal condition caused by [alcoholism] 1

For example, terrorism does not mean the worship of terror. Darwinism is not the worship of Charles Darwin; it refers to his theory of biological evolution. Likewise, Hinduism is not the worship of Hindu, instead it refers to a complex set of beliefs that center around reincarnation, castes, customs, Vedic scriptures, and a multiplicity of gods. Lastly, Judaism isn't the worship of Judah (Yehuda) who was the fourth son of Jacob and Leah. So there is no reason to insist that Muhammadanism signifies that Muslims worship Muhammad.

    She [Leah] conceived again, and when she gave birth to a son she said, "This time I will praise the LORD." So she named him Judah. Then she stopped having children. Genesis 29:35 (NIV)

    ÙˆØ­Ø¨Ù„ت ايضا وولدت ابنا وقالت هذه المرة احمد الرب . لذلك دعت اسمه يهوذا . ثم توقفت عن الولادة .  ØªÙƒÙˆÙŠÙ† ٢٩‏:٣٥

English speaking Muslims know what -ism signifies, but some disingenuously insist that Muhammadanism still implies the worship of Muhammad. Yet, these same Muslims add the suffix -ism to words knowing that the resulting word does not imply worship. For example, they use the term, Marxism, to describe the system of thought that Karl Marx developed in Das Kapital. When they use the term, Marxism, they know that Marxists don't go to sacred building to worship and pray to Karl Marx, and they would never suggest that Marxists revere Karl Marx as a divine object of worship. Now, if Muslims understand words like Marxism, Judaism, Hinduism, and Darwinism, why is it so difficult for them to understand the word, Muhammadanism?

Muslims refer to the Qur'an and the Sunnah of Muhammad as the basis for their religion. The Qur'an instructs Muslims to pattern their lives after Muhammad because he is thought to be the perfect pattern of conduct. To accomplish this task, Muslims study many volumes of the hadiths, because these books contain his sayings and behavior (Sunnah).

    Ye have indeed in the Messenger of Allah a beautiful pattern (of conduct) for any one whose hope is in Allah and the Final Day, and who engages much in the Praise of Allah. Sura Al-Ahzab 33:21 (Yusuf Ali's translation)

    Ù„َقَدْ كَانَ لَكُمْ فِي رَسُولِ اللَّهِ أُسْوَةٌ حَسَنَةٌ لِّمَن كَانَ يَرْجُو اللَّهَ وَالْيَوْمَ الْآخِرَ وَذَكَرَ اللَّهَ كَثِيرًا. سورة الأحزاب ٣٣‏:٢١

    The prophet of Islam is considered by Muslims to have been the most perfect of men, in fact the most noble and perfect of all of Allah's creation, ashraf al-makhluqat. Allah bestowed upon him all the virtues and all the perfections which the human state is capable of possessing. As the Noble Qur'an states, he did not acquire the state of prophethood by himself but was chosen by Allah; furthermore, all of the virtues became perfectly actualized in him. Therefore, he is seen by Muslims as the perfect model for human life to imitate. He is the perfect or universal man, al-insan al-kamil and the Quran itself refers to him as the example to be emulated in the verse, "Verily in the Messenger of Allah ye have a good example" (XXXIII:21).2

In fact, Muslims obey Muhammad as if they were obeying Allah. This shows the elevated place that Muhammad occupies.

        He who obeys the Messenger, obeys Allah. Sura An-Nisa 4:80

        Ù…َّنْ يُطِعِ الرَّسُولَ فَقَدْ أَطَاعَ اللّهَ   سورة النساء  Ù¤â€:٨٠

These Muslim sources show the central place that Muhammad had in the establishment of his religion.

Islam is a term that carries many uncritical assumptions and biases that may not be freely investigated by Muslims. On the other hand, as a term, Muhammadanism does not ground itself upon these presuppositions. Instead it critically assesses the truth claims of Muhammad in an objective manner that values academic and intellectual freedom. Most Muslims find this approach distasteful and personally dangerous, so they reject this approach to the study of Muhammad.

In the back of some Muslims' minds is Shari'a law that demands the death of a Muslim who would deny an Islamic tenet where there is prior scholarly consensus.

    "Someone raised among Muslims who denies the obligatoriness of the prayer, zakat, fasting Ramadan, the pilgrimage, or the unlawfulness of wine and adultery, or denies something else upon which there is scholarly consensus (ijmn', def:b7) and which is necessarily known as being of the religion (N: necessarily known meaning things that any Muslim would know about if asked) thereby becomes an unbeliever (kafir) and is executed for his unbelief..." f1.3, 3

On the other hand the term, Muhammadanism, has been used by scholars past and present who value intellectual freedom and the pursuit of truth. Because of this, the term, Muhammadanism, is an enlightened and eminently appropriate term to use for the intellectual study of Muhammad's teachings without assuming the uncritical presuppositions of Muslim believers. This is why scholars often use the term, Muhammadanism, to describe the topic of their investigation.

There is no reason why a Muslim who values intellectual freedom should be offended by the term. Quite the contrary, they should encourage an unfettered study of the teaching and life of Muhammad and follow the path of truth wherever it leads them. Our prayer should always be,

        Show us the straight way. al-Fatiha 1:6

        Ø§Ù‡Ø¯ÙÙ†ÙŽÙ€Ù€Ù€Ù€Ø§ الصِّرَاطَ المُستَقِيمَ سورة الفاتحة Ù¦

We should be able to walk this path without the dread of Shari'a casting its dark shadow over our love and pursuit of the truth.

    There is no fear in love. But perfect love drives out fear, because fear has to do with punishment. The one who fears is not made perfect in love. I John 4:18 (NIV)

    Ù„ا خوف في المحبة بل المحبة الكاملة تطرح الخوف الى خارج لان الخوف له عذاب واما من خاف فلم يتكمل في المحبة.  Ù¡ يوحنا ٤‏:١٨

May Allah guide you to His Truth and Love.