That sounds logical enough, but there's a reason for the Muslim objection to the term Muhammadan (or however you want to spell it.) The term is a nineteenth century European Orientalist one that implies that Muslims believe Muhammad's relationship to Allah is the same as that of Jesus to God. In the latter case, Jesus is one of the Holy Trinity and has divine status.
Christians who do not know much about Islam are likely to buttume that Muslims believe that Muhammad has divine status in Islam just as Jesus does for Christians, but one of the hallmarks of Islam is that Muhammad is a man. He is unique in that Allah chose him, according to the Islamic tradition, to be the mouthpiece for divine utterances - the Qur'an - but he is not divine or in any way comparable to Jesus, except that the Muslims believe Jesus was an earlier prophet, like Moses or others of the Old Testament. But Muhammad is a man - not God Incarnate.
Muslims will suspect you of attempting to create confusion amongst westerners about Muhammad's status in Islam by referring to Muslims as Muhammadans. To many Muslims, this is an intentional slight on their religion, although it may well not be - it may simply be your ignorance of their sensitivity towards the term. If you continue to use it, knowing how they feel about it, then you will be using it mischievously.
Rifty
-- Academic and Computing Help
