Nobody wants people killing others, for "religious" reasons, or presumably any other. But it is important to recognize that both of these faiths are missionary religions. That is central to their identity. Muslims and Christians are commanded to seek converts [in the New Testament, "disciples"]. This cannot be wished away.

As far as the tactics of the "CAMEL's", missionaries vary; some are more aggressive, or by the writer's apparent implication, deceptive. The Apostle Paul wrote, "I have become all things to all men, that I might by all means save some." This does mean deception, but to find common ground from which to approach people. Paul did this in Athens, borrowing from Greek religion and literature to create this opportunity. With Jews, he initially went to synagogues, and contended with them there. At a number of points, he was beaten and thrown into prison. Tradition has it that he died in prison waiting for his chance to get to Rome.

The Koran is a natural "bridge" to Muslims, as the Bible is to Christians. There is absolutely nothing wrong with utilizing them. Likewise, terminology like "Muslim," as the writer states, has been used as such a bridge - as the writer says - one "submitted to God." Christ, loosely translated, could be interpreted as "Chosen One" ["Word of God," again as the writer suggests, is a common term to the 2 faiths. The question is, of, course, what it means. A good place to start discussing the issue].

I live in a "Muslim" country [not Oklahoma, actually]. Here, in my university, the Bible is a "forbidden" book; if you look for it in the library [by computer], you warned of such in no uncertain terms. Students at my school have attempted to proselytize me, something also forbidden by law to non-Muslims.

Why do I share that? I believe those Muslims have a right to share their faith with me, in virtually any way they choose. I am willing to accept the restrictions here [as a Christian] because I think our presence here important enough to accept the restrictions. Several students asked to borrow the Bible from me, and I have allowed it - I could be fired and put out of the country if this were discovered. But as they have the right, I believe, to share their faith, the same right do I have. We are both willing to take the risks in doing so.

As for the Pentecostals in Nigeria, and the CAMEL's wherever they are, I see nothing wrong with what they are doing. Strife may very well result, but honest "evangelical" Christians, and Muslims, would have it no other way.

"But whatever form the recruiting takes, it is often perceived by Muslims as cultural aggression — unprovoked aggression, since they’re not generally inclined to proselytize..."

This generalisation is generally innaccurate both in terms of: (A) my experience; and (B) Islamic history and theology.

(A) - While visiting numerous different Muslim countries (Arab and otherwise) I have been subject to informal proselytising which is usually very friendly and not at all aggressive. Organised proselytising is undertaken by many contempory organisations/sects (a particularly well funded example being Salafi groups) both within and beyond what is traditionally seen as the Muslim world.

(B) - Many different Muslim groups have a historical tradition of organised proselytising activity, often referred to as da'wah (دعوة), meaning "issuing a summons" or "making an invitation". The Qu'ran uses the expression da'wah when instructing Muslims to encourage piety amongst their co-religionists. This instruction was broadened to include non-Muslims as Islamic theology matured in the two or three centuries following the death of Muhammad.

And let's not forget Pastor John Hagee of Cornerstone Church in San Antonio, Texas. He argues that the United States must join Israel in a preemptive military strike against Iran to fulfill God's plan for both Israel and the West. His stealth Rapture group is Christians United for Israel. Guess who's going to be left behind in the Rapture?
What a monumental waste of time and humanity all this proselytizing and slicing and dicing and warmongering among the religions is. Truly insane.

As a Muslim I have no problem with the "camel" method because it is the easiest argument to turn on its head. The verses of the Quran that reference Jesus are specifically meant to refute any notion of the idea of "Son of God". Unfortunately the very people the "camel" method is targeting, Muslims who are ill read and ill informed of their own faith are the very people most likely to resort to violence because of these so called provocations.

Christians are told by Christ to go forth and make believers of all nations. That is part of what makes someone a Christian. Does it cause turmoil - you bet. Should Christians back away from this central thesis of their religion - absolutely not.

Your postscript belatedly gets to the truth: there is a real common root to the Christian God and the Islamic Allah; according to the Koran.

So today, finding common ground is now divisive? Aren't you letting the perfect be the enemy of the good? To be sure, some object to the use many have put these commonalities to. But after all, perhaps this is the only way Muslims and Christians will ever find common ground: why are you trying so hard to destroy it?

Here's another Jewish voice in agreement (along with Larry, comment #2) with Muslim and Christian critics of aggressive conversion techniques. "Jews for Jesus" and "Messianic Jews" have been conducting stealth attacks on Jewish people for years. Deceptive practices like using Hebrew words, conducting services out of Jewish prayer books, and celebrating Jewish holy days have been in these groups' repertoires for years; are we now going to start hearing about Koranic Christians and the like?

Throughout time, people have sought to stress difference to prevent dialogue, respect, and unity. The truth is that Jews, Christians, and Muslims all worship the God of Abraham who is the God who formed a covenant with us. We may have many names for the One who essentially remains nameless, but we all worship the same God. Caner is from Fallwell's college so I wouldn't expect theological genius here.

I thought the author's analogy of Muslim evangelizers trying to convert Christian children and the reaction we would have, quite thought provoking. Perhaps Christians should try to convert people by living lives of charity and love that would attract people to their beliefs rather than try to aggressively evangelize by disingenuous methods.

We need to get to a post-evangelical world as soon as possible--one where we listen first and seek to persuade much later, if at all. Why would anyone listen to someone who will not take the time to learn and understand?

I have long considered proselytizing to be arrogant, unethical, and just plain impolite. Evangelicals, however, believe that spreading the Gospel in order to save souls is required by God, so there is no hope that they will change their ways. True believers of any stripe are dangerous, even when their motives are of the highest.

Religious missionaries can certainly be annoying.
So can political, social, environmental and other missionaries.
I'm tired of people of all kinds trying to convince me to vote their way, recycle, eat or not eat certain foods, or whatever.
It's not just organized religions who have annoying "true believers."
I put up with all these annoyances, because our social and political system is based on there being a marketplace of ideas. We protect and even encourage participation in this marketplace.
The article actually seems to justify the use of violence when someone is talking about religious concepts they don't agree with by blaming talkers for violent reaction.
In the past, "Christian soldiers," were literally soldiers. There were conversions by the sword. Much of the Islamic world was also converted to Islam by the sword as well. All the Christians in the Middle East didn't suddenly one day decide to become Muslims without military conquest by Muslim armies coercion.
In modern times, Christians seem to have been "converted" to using the marketplace of ideas and abandoning forced conversions. That seems like progress.
I am surprised to find the New York times and many of its readers seeming to advocate creating a religious exception to the marketplace of ideas concept as a societal model.
Is that progress?

As a Christian, I think this is a good and valuable conversation to have. Although, I disagree that religion is the cause of wars...money is the cause of wars, but sometimes leaders hide that fact in religious language. The love of money is the root of all evil.

But here is one fact that many of my fellow Christians tend to forget: we're sinners too, and we need to stop publicly acting like we're not. All I ask is that you don't blame God for the acts of sinful people, and don't blame all Christians for the acts of those in public view.

God doesn't want your heart by force, fear or coercion, he wants you to choose to give it willingly. Not everyone is ready for that at points in their life. You can tell them what you know about God, but you can't force a genuine offering of the heart. Attempting to do so, in my opinion, mocks God by suggesting that He can't do it without you turning screws.

'THERE SHALL BE no coercion in matters of faith'. (2:256) It is in the Koran. A Muslim must believe in that. The missionaries go to the Muslims land in disguise under false pretenses. Sometimes as doctor, aid workers or whatever disguises works. But always with money and diplomatic support from Western liberal democracies. These countries preach and boast for their enlightenment but export their cooked up faiths to poor countries. I highly appreciate this column. These missionaries are source of many tense situations around the world.

I would like to thank Mr. Wright for an incredibly refreshing and honest analysis of the effects of aggressive missionary activity on US foreign policy in the Muslim world. It is this kind of intellectual honesty that I hope to see the West transmit to the Muslim world through respectful peer to peer interaction. I'm particularly awed by Mr. Wright's assessment of the Prophet Muhammad's goals in the post-script. This is one of the most spot on a fair assessment of Islam's formation that I have read in recent recollection.

Many Christian missionaries are doing wonderful work in the Muslim world and are doing so without fomenting conflict, and by leading by example. Those who aggressively seek to undermine the faith of others, or worse -- to essentially bribe the poor with resources in exchange for conversion -- do harm to our American interests abroad and to the reputation of the many admirable and selfless Christian missionaries doing good works internationally.

As to the Christian use of Allah as the name of God: the indigenous Christians of the Middle East, at least the Orthodox and Catholic ones, when they celebrate Eucharistic and other liturgies in Arabic as most do (sometimes with some Greek or Syriac as well), use the word Allah where we would use God (theos, Deus, le bon Dieu, or whatever) The Arabic translations of the liturgies also accord God the title Rabb, as the Qur'an does for Allah. There are debates over the nature of Allah (trinitarian vs. unitarian most fundamentally) but until this controversy in Malaysia came along--and I note that Arabic is a foreign language there as it is for most Americans--there's not, among native speakers, a linguistic one. We might do well in our discussion, sometimes, to recall, and maybe even learn from, the Arabic-speaking Christians who have been in the region all along. Liberty Baptist College and the like may wish they had a monopoly on the name Christian, but they don't.

It is a rare occasion that I feel compelled to submit a comment on articles such as these, but in this instance, I have no choice. In reading the article, as well as the comments below it, I feel as though many of you, including Mr. Wright I'm afraid, have missed the point entirely.

First of all, there is nothing offensive about spreading the Good News of Christ. The Bible charges believers with the duty to go out into the world and speak of Jesus and the salvation offered through Him. We are responsible for building the Kingdom of God on Earth and do so by sharing the Gospel.

There are indeed common threads between Muslim teachings and the Bible and it does a great deal of good in the effort towards world peace to discuss them. Understanding not only our differences, but also our commonalities, is the best way to create dialogue between cultures and religions.

On the issue of faith being an entirely personal endeavor, I must disagree in part. Following Christ and knowing God are multifaceted. While God wants to develop a personal relationship with us through His son, Jesus Christ, we are also meant to worship Him as a community of believers. We were never meant to exist as islands in the interconnected world He created. We were meant to live in His Kingdom together.

Finally, to those of the Jewish faith who expressed discontent over programs supporting "Jews for Jesus", I must remind you that Christ Himself was a Jew, as were His followers in His day. I should also point out that Judaism has both religious and cultural aspects. Those Jews who have embraced Christ as their Savior, have not strayed from Judaism, in fact, they've held fast to it. They have maintained the cultural practices of the Jews while simply accepting that the wait for their Messiah is over -- and how thrilling it is to know that He has come, and is coming again!

In closing, I beseech you to consider that perhaps these missionaries are simply people who are on fire for the Lord and are doing what they have been called to do by spreading the Word. I'll admit, some are better than others in this quest, and certainly not all people who claim to be Christians have Biblically-sound interests at heart. But in general terms, the desire to share Jesus with the world is one that should be met with open ears and arms. God is love and peace and justice, He is all the things we are aching for in this world that feels so torn apart. Why not let Him in?

In the early ‘70s, when I was a self-professed born-again Christian attending classes at Ohio State University, I belonged to a campus group well-known for its aggressive evangelism. One technique we used was approaching unwary students and asking if they would like to partake in a “religious survey”. The bogus survey had no other purpose than to trick students into discussing Jesus, etc., and we just threw them (the surveys) away after they’d served their purpose. It always surprised me how few survey-takers took us to task on this blatant deception, but those who did were justly furious at having been manipulated in this way. I’m not at all surprised at what I’ve learned in this article. Generous, broad-minded people would like to think that “Christians” who do this kind of thing are really well-meaning people. I looked at all the definitions of “well-meaning” included at dictionary.com and couldn’t find one that alluded to deceptive, manipulative behavior. I consider my finest life-achievement to be having freed myself from this wack, twisted world-view.

Every religion on earth is reaching out for the same God. Our conceptions of that God may be very different, even, alas, twisted. But just as the Romans reached out to "The Unknown God," so, too, do all religions. Yes, we are reaching for the same God as the Muslims, Jews, and everyone else, even if our conceptions and doctrines about that God are very different. We each have our own version of "through a glass darkly."

IF IF IF IF we can acknowledge that we are all seeking the same God, we will have laid a framework that will allow Christians to look differently at Muslims and vice versa, to say of each other, "The others may not be as advanced as we are, but they are on a journey." That allows us some breathing room and grace with one another. But there is ignorance, as well as vested interests, within Christianity and Islam that believes (or wishes us to believe) that the other guys don't even serve the same God. Well, what other God is there to serve?

Though I am a conservative, evangelical Christian (one of those aggressive Pentecostals!), I am somewhat amazed that the Christian Right seems to embrace everything Israel does, while Jews are much more antagonistic toward Jesus than are the Muslims. Of course, Jews aren't killing people for being Christians, but in terms of how they feel about Jesus Himself, there is a world of difference. Go figure. Seems we'd be closer friends with the Muslims than the Jews if it's about religion.

I look forward to the day when a Muslim and a Christian can have "doctrinal" debates that are about the true nature of the God that they both seek. That sort of discussion--dreaded by certain elements in both religions--will bring us closer together. Many Muslims will be won to Christianity, many Christians will moderate their views of Islam, and maybe, just maybe, brotherhood between the children of God (He is the Father of ALL, you know) can be restored to some degree.

How can Mr. Wright say these proselytizers "mean well" when clearly what they mean to do isn't well and good by his own estimation? To gild their intentions ill-serves his position and gives a pass to Americans who do know better.

I never understood why some types of Christians try to convert other types of Christians. I was raised Episcopalian in a Southern Baptist state. I never heard the end of it while growing up. Baptists were after me for my entire childhood and youth because somehow they believe Episcopalians are not Christians. Seems like people should learn a few things before they preach that their way is the only way.

This behavior is troubling. Recently I have become aware of a movement, very purposeful and coercive, with Evangelical Christianity that seeks to convert fellow troops as well. Check out "The Military Religious Freedom Foundation," which addresses the issue in depth.

In my estimation there is no place for this type of behavior in the military. Great damage is being done in the name of religion. Their proselytizing is dangerous and counterproductive to the safety of our country. Why are not top military officials on top of this? Forgive them - they know not what they do.

The Caliph Omar, in the early days of Islam, was asked to explain Religion and the five diktats of Islam. He replied: Prayer is a habit, Fasting is endurance but Religion is the way you treat your fellow men. Short, lucid and to the point...

I'm a Christian and happy to talk with anyone who has interest in my religion. But deceiving someone of another belief by falsely telling them I believe as they do is wrong at every level. I'm confident Jesus would not approve of most of the tactics currently used by "evangelicals, pentecostals, proselytizers" or anyone else who tries to convert people through lies and deception. Our's should be a religion of attraction, not coercion.

Jesus said Christianity can be defined in five words...... Love God, Love your neighbor. That seems simple enough.

And then God laughed.... and then She cried.