This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
I am in contact with a professional voice actor who is trying to record a spoken version of George Washington and he wants to hear someone pronounce "Mohammedan". If anyone would be willing to call him up or even leave a voice mail with the proper pronunciation, please email me and I will send you his contact info. Thanks. howcheng { chat} 18:08, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
It was not uncommon for Islam to be referred to as the "Faith of Muhammad", and so it wasn't completly unheard of to refer to Islam by the name of its founder. Ahassan05 18:50, 30 June 2007 (UTC)ahassan05
It is also referred to as Din-i-Ibrahim and countless other names have been given it I am sure, but I just wanted to point out that at least in the Ottoman literature or census documents it is not at all uncommon to see Din-e-Muhammadiyyeh used to mean Islam. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ahassan05 ( talk • contribs) 14:50, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
Might I point out that a Muslim source isn't necessarily a reliable source for the etymology of an English word? The OED, which is a reliable source on English, offers not a hint of this. I have besides never read anywhere that Europeans ever attributed the worship of Mohammed to Muslims. I think we really need a Eurpoean source representing this belief and relating it to the origin of the word -- which itself only dates to the 18th century according to the OED, far too late IMO for a European to make this kind of mistake. A Crusader might have, but not an Enlightenment-era Orientalist. TCC (talk) (contribs) 20:09, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
I'm cutting the claim that Westerners once believed that Muslims worshiped Mohammed. An Islamic source for this that flat-out misunderstands this term is clearly not reliable. I must insist on a Western source. If it was once a widespread belief, one should not be difficult to locate. But I don't think it was. TCC (talk) (contribs) 18:14, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
The Muslim claim that "Mohammedan" is based on the understanding of Muslims worshipping Mohammed is itself a misunderstanding. We can establish the existence of the misunderstanding, but it nevertheless remains a misunderstanding. This is part of the deplorable over-sensitivity acquired by the Muslim world during the 20th century, out of a sheer minority complex wrt the west. It is time Islam found back its confidence and stopped pulling hysterical acts over non-issues such as this one. -- dab (𒁳) 16:27, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
Mohammedan (also spelt Muhammadan, Mahommedan, Mahomedan or Mahometan) is a Westernized term for Muslims, that Muslims consider both offensive and inaccurate because it suggests that Muslims are the followers of the Islamic prophet Muhammad. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.178.77.28 ( talk) 11:24, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
Mohammedanism was used by Muslims about Islam without its spirit, [1] Muhammadans (not Muslims) of to-day (1920) have forgotten the principle of the path of grace through one God, and have therefore become intolerant fanatics, which accounts largely for the loss of political power of most Muhammadan Governments of modern times. [2] St.Trond ( talk) 11:43, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
What tone or style may not be appropriate for Wikipedia? Please specify. Specific concerns will help resolve the issue. Otherwise the tag should be removed.-- J. D. Redding 01:31, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
I would not be infavor of a merge. I would be in favor of expanding this article... and do a WP:SUMMARY on the page of Islam of this article. Unless there is an objection, the merge notice should be remove shortly. -- J. D. Redding 01:31, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
-- J. D. Redding 02:07, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
-- J. D. Redding 02:15, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
The actual misnomer is Islam which means more or less "faith". Usage of the misnomer "Islam" in the sense of "Mohammedanism" leads to the endless complaints at Talk:Islam that "Islam has no founder". Doh, no, "Islam" has no founder if you use the term in its Arabic meaning of faith. It does have a founder if you realize that "Islam" outside of Arabic is a misnomer for "Mohammedanism", i.e. the religious tradition founded by Muhammad. -- dab (𒁳) 16:06, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
I removed - "Muslim" was in the times of the Quran reserved descendants of Abraham, [1] but is since July 2005 free for all Islamic faiths listed in the Amman Message to use. citation needed - as this is not true, and the reference doesn't back up the claim dk4 ( talk) 13:55, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
An image of Mohammad, pbuh, with sword-in-hand trampling the ten commandments and the globe? Is it possible for you to insult my religion any more? I won't remove it because i respect freedom of speech, and admit my own obvious bias, and of course Wikimedia has made it quite clear repeatedly that they frankly dont care about our beliefs... possibly fairly, it is factual not spiritual, but I have to request that someone else take a nonpartisan look at this and ask why this article a: needs a picture of the Prophet, pbuh, especially considering it seriously violates the religion to which the article refers, b: if it WAS relevant and completely necessary, this insult can not even be excused as being a fair representation c: is clearly not neutral and d: directs an incredibly offensive insult to the culture and religion of a large portion of the world, for NO reason.
To update, while i have been typing another user has removed it, but i ask that you consider all facts and don't reinstate it.
And of course that image of Mohammed and the character it represents isn't correct at all. Is it? Hmmm??? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.105.46.180 ( talk) 23:36, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
Does Islam preach that Judaism and Christianity are CORRUPTIONS of Islam - as most Christians consider Mormonism to be a corruption of Christianity - or merely INCOMPLETE VERSIONS of Islam - in the way Christians consider Judaism to be an incomplete form of Christianity?
According to the last paragraph, it is considered a corruption. But considering there are Christian writings dating from the 1st and second centuries - and Jewish writings and references to Jews even older - and there is no reference to anything quite like Islam before the mid 600s - that does not seem a tenable position. And it makes the last paragraph seem to have been written simply to discredit Islam.
But if it IS true that Moslems officially see Christianity and Judaism as a CORRUPTION of, and not an INCOMPLETE, Islam, I recommend better references than only that last, unverified sentence. If proof can be given that Christianity and Judaism CAME BEFORE Islam, it should replace that lastg sentence.
That, or scrap the whole last parapgraph. That's my opinion.
71.215.44.216 ( talk) 23:13, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
Medieval Christians believed that Muslims worshipped a trinity consisting of "Mahom", Tervagan and Apollin. Please see the Chanson de Roland or Karlamagnus, they both make this claim. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ahassan05 ( talk • contribs) 16:41, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
[User:jingiby] has on multiple occasions reverted the vandalism in the final paragraph which among other things states that Muslims worship Alexander the Great. He was warned by user:jojo897 and continues to revert the vandalism. Mr.sam.oliver ( talk) 09:46, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
Please do not remove large amounts of cited information without consensus. Make incremental changes to specific sections/phrases, and discuss them. Discuss references if you believe they are not reliable. If there are not enough editors active on the talk page to gain consensus, call an RFC. St John Chrysostom view/ my bias 19:56, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
Mohammedan was the term used for Islam In europe and the Americas. Until Muslims started to come in numbers to the USA, Mohammedan was corrected and the Term for the religion founded by Muhammad, is now accepted by the west and america as Islam, and its followers, Muslim. Just like the article says, Confucianist and Calvinist do not revere John Calvin and Confucious as Gods. Neither do muslims. This thinking today is very primative.-- Obaidz96 ( talk • contribs • count) 14:44, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
it depends what you mean by "revere". It is undisputed that there is strong veneration for Muhammad in Islam, as evidenced by the popular outrage over depictions of Muhammad. No Muslim would object to a depiction of other Muslim rulers or conquerors, such as Suleiman the Magnificent, which shows that the veneration for Muhammad is of a religious nature. But this is irrelevant to this article, and needs to be addressed over at Veneration for Muhammad. -- dab (𒁳) 16:22, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
The sourcing for the non-Muslim views in the section is inadequate. Page numbers are not provided for most citations. And page 224 of Spencer's book says no such thing. Can we get some page numbers and quotes?
It is also doubtful that any of these authors currently use the term Mohammedan to refer to Muslim or Mohammedanism to refer to Islam. Spencer [3] [4], Ibn Warraq [5] [6] et al. all use the word "Islam" and "Muslim" in their discourse. Who exactly uses the term "Mohammedan" in present day discourse?
Besides, Spencer is a questionable source [7] and should not be used, except in his own articles. This has been agreed upon previously at Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard. Bless sins ( talk) 22:08, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
In the context of this discussion, I think adding the letters "ian" or "an" to the end of a person's name or title refers to being a follower of that person or a follower of that person's teachings, not necessarily a worshiper of that person. In the case of Christ-ian ( Christian), this would be a follower of Jesus Christ and/or his teachings. In the case of Mohammed-an, this would be a follower of Mohammad and/or his teachings. As already indicated, a Luther-an ( Lutheran) would be a follower of Martin Luther and/or his teachings.
As described in Wiktionary, the suffix "-ian" or "-an" means one from, belonging to, relating to, or like.
Hotdjdave ( talk) 14:41, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
I'm surprised no one appears to have raised this before. The content of this article seems more appropriate to be a re-direct to Islam with a footnote about the word Mohammedan on that page. DeCausa ( talk) 13:21, 8 March 2015 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
I am in contact with a professional voice actor who is trying to record a spoken version of George Washington and he wants to hear someone pronounce "Mohammedan". If anyone would be willing to call him up or even leave a voice mail with the proper pronunciation, please email me and I will send you his contact info. Thanks. howcheng { chat} 18:08, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
It was not uncommon for Islam to be referred to as the "Faith of Muhammad", and so it wasn't completly unheard of to refer to Islam by the name of its founder. Ahassan05 18:50, 30 June 2007 (UTC)ahassan05
It is also referred to as Din-i-Ibrahim and countless other names have been given it I am sure, but I just wanted to point out that at least in the Ottoman literature or census documents it is not at all uncommon to see Din-e-Muhammadiyyeh used to mean Islam. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ahassan05 ( talk • contribs) 14:50, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
Might I point out that a Muslim source isn't necessarily a reliable source for the etymology of an English word? The OED, which is a reliable source on English, offers not a hint of this. I have besides never read anywhere that Europeans ever attributed the worship of Mohammed to Muslims. I think we really need a Eurpoean source representing this belief and relating it to the origin of the word -- which itself only dates to the 18th century according to the OED, far too late IMO for a European to make this kind of mistake. A Crusader might have, but not an Enlightenment-era Orientalist. TCC (talk) (contribs) 20:09, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
I'm cutting the claim that Westerners once believed that Muslims worshiped Mohammed. An Islamic source for this that flat-out misunderstands this term is clearly not reliable. I must insist on a Western source. If it was once a widespread belief, one should not be difficult to locate. But I don't think it was. TCC (talk) (contribs) 18:14, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
The Muslim claim that "Mohammedan" is based on the understanding of Muslims worshipping Mohammed is itself a misunderstanding. We can establish the existence of the misunderstanding, but it nevertheless remains a misunderstanding. This is part of the deplorable over-sensitivity acquired by the Muslim world during the 20th century, out of a sheer minority complex wrt the west. It is time Islam found back its confidence and stopped pulling hysterical acts over non-issues such as this one. -- dab (𒁳) 16:27, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
Mohammedan (also spelt Muhammadan, Mahommedan, Mahomedan or Mahometan) is a Westernized term for Muslims, that Muslims consider both offensive and inaccurate because it suggests that Muslims are the followers of the Islamic prophet Muhammad. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.178.77.28 ( talk) 11:24, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
Mohammedanism was used by Muslims about Islam without its spirit, [1] Muhammadans (not Muslims) of to-day (1920) have forgotten the principle of the path of grace through one God, and have therefore become intolerant fanatics, which accounts largely for the loss of political power of most Muhammadan Governments of modern times. [2] St.Trond ( talk) 11:43, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
What tone or style may not be appropriate for Wikipedia? Please specify. Specific concerns will help resolve the issue. Otherwise the tag should be removed.-- J. D. Redding 01:31, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
I would not be infavor of a merge. I would be in favor of expanding this article... and do a WP:SUMMARY on the page of Islam of this article. Unless there is an objection, the merge notice should be remove shortly. -- J. D. Redding 01:31, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
-- J. D. Redding 02:07, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
-- J. D. Redding 02:15, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
The actual misnomer is Islam which means more or less "faith". Usage of the misnomer "Islam" in the sense of "Mohammedanism" leads to the endless complaints at Talk:Islam that "Islam has no founder". Doh, no, "Islam" has no founder if you use the term in its Arabic meaning of faith. It does have a founder if you realize that "Islam" outside of Arabic is a misnomer for "Mohammedanism", i.e. the religious tradition founded by Muhammad. -- dab (𒁳) 16:06, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
I removed - "Muslim" was in the times of the Quran reserved descendants of Abraham, [1] but is since July 2005 free for all Islamic faiths listed in the Amman Message to use. citation needed - as this is not true, and the reference doesn't back up the claim dk4 ( talk) 13:55, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
An image of Mohammad, pbuh, with sword-in-hand trampling the ten commandments and the globe? Is it possible for you to insult my religion any more? I won't remove it because i respect freedom of speech, and admit my own obvious bias, and of course Wikimedia has made it quite clear repeatedly that they frankly dont care about our beliefs... possibly fairly, it is factual not spiritual, but I have to request that someone else take a nonpartisan look at this and ask why this article a: needs a picture of the Prophet, pbuh, especially considering it seriously violates the religion to which the article refers, b: if it WAS relevant and completely necessary, this insult can not even be excused as being a fair representation c: is clearly not neutral and d: directs an incredibly offensive insult to the culture and religion of a large portion of the world, for NO reason.
To update, while i have been typing another user has removed it, but i ask that you consider all facts and don't reinstate it.
And of course that image of Mohammed and the character it represents isn't correct at all. Is it? Hmmm??? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.105.46.180 ( talk) 23:36, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
Does Islam preach that Judaism and Christianity are CORRUPTIONS of Islam - as most Christians consider Mormonism to be a corruption of Christianity - or merely INCOMPLETE VERSIONS of Islam - in the way Christians consider Judaism to be an incomplete form of Christianity?
According to the last paragraph, it is considered a corruption. But considering there are Christian writings dating from the 1st and second centuries - and Jewish writings and references to Jews even older - and there is no reference to anything quite like Islam before the mid 600s - that does not seem a tenable position. And it makes the last paragraph seem to have been written simply to discredit Islam.
But if it IS true that Moslems officially see Christianity and Judaism as a CORRUPTION of, and not an INCOMPLETE, Islam, I recommend better references than only that last, unverified sentence. If proof can be given that Christianity and Judaism CAME BEFORE Islam, it should replace that lastg sentence.
That, or scrap the whole last parapgraph. That's my opinion.
71.215.44.216 ( talk) 23:13, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
Medieval Christians believed that Muslims worshipped a trinity consisting of "Mahom", Tervagan and Apollin. Please see the Chanson de Roland or Karlamagnus, they both make this claim. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ahassan05 ( talk • contribs) 16:41, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
[User:jingiby] has on multiple occasions reverted the vandalism in the final paragraph which among other things states that Muslims worship Alexander the Great. He was warned by user:jojo897 and continues to revert the vandalism. Mr.sam.oliver ( talk) 09:46, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
Please do not remove large amounts of cited information without consensus. Make incremental changes to specific sections/phrases, and discuss them. Discuss references if you believe they are not reliable. If there are not enough editors active on the talk page to gain consensus, call an RFC. St John Chrysostom view/ my bias 19:56, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
Mohammedan was the term used for Islam In europe and the Americas. Until Muslims started to come in numbers to the USA, Mohammedan was corrected and the Term for the religion founded by Muhammad, is now accepted by the west and america as Islam, and its followers, Muslim. Just like the article says, Confucianist and Calvinist do not revere John Calvin and Confucious as Gods. Neither do muslims. This thinking today is very primative.-- Obaidz96 ( talk • contribs • count) 14:44, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
it depends what you mean by "revere". It is undisputed that there is strong veneration for Muhammad in Islam, as evidenced by the popular outrage over depictions of Muhammad. No Muslim would object to a depiction of other Muslim rulers or conquerors, such as Suleiman the Magnificent, which shows that the veneration for Muhammad is of a religious nature. But this is irrelevant to this article, and needs to be addressed over at Veneration for Muhammad. -- dab (𒁳) 16:22, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
The sourcing for the non-Muslim views in the section is inadequate. Page numbers are not provided for most citations. And page 224 of Spencer's book says no such thing. Can we get some page numbers and quotes?
It is also doubtful that any of these authors currently use the term Mohammedan to refer to Muslim or Mohammedanism to refer to Islam. Spencer [3] [4], Ibn Warraq [5] [6] et al. all use the word "Islam" and "Muslim" in their discourse. Who exactly uses the term "Mohammedan" in present day discourse?
Besides, Spencer is a questionable source [7] and should not be used, except in his own articles. This has been agreed upon previously at Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard. Bless sins ( talk) 22:08, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
In the context of this discussion, I think adding the letters "ian" or "an" to the end of a person's name or title refers to being a follower of that person or a follower of that person's teachings, not necessarily a worshiper of that person. In the case of Christ-ian ( Christian), this would be a follower of Jesus Christ and/or his teachings. In the case of Mohammed-an, this would be a follower of Mohammad and/or his teachings. As already indicated, a Luther-an ( Lutheran) would be a follower of Martin Luther and/or his teachings.
As described in Wiktionary, the suffix "-ian" or "-an" means one from, belonging to, relating to, or like.
Hotdjdave ( talk) 14:41, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
I'm surprised no one appears to have raised this before. The content of this article seems more appropriate to be a re-direct to Islam with a footnote about the word Mohammedan on that page. DeCausa ( talk) 13:21, 8 March 2015 (UTC)