Ms Harper seemed to emphasize that the way to win over evangelicals is by signaling an adversarial relationship; by creating an "other" that is not of "us". Harper presents this key insight in a benign way, as though there would be no adverse consequences from such a view. I found your interview lacking in that it seemed to have been taken in by Harper's calm and almost sweet nature.

I found Harper's words troubling. They seem to show that, in the heart of evangelicals, tolerance for an "other" apart from "them" cannot be sustained. Harper confesses to a need to identify or create an adversary, and then to prevail over that figure. Taken to its logical conclusion, this leads to a world where there are only evangelicals. But once at that point, then what? Whom do the evangelicals identify as the adversary? I suspect that, as the Puritanical era and Atwood's Handmaid's Tale show us, such a society would sustain itself by accusing the weak within their own ranks, creating a tyrannical civilization.

I would have pressed Harper about the lack of tolerance in her community. I would have asked to comment on whether she would be fearful of living in tyranny.

Ms. Harper is one of a small but growing group of Christians who are speaking out against the idolatry that has grown up since the 80s (at least) where some Christians have been worshipping an elephant instead of the Living God.
For everyone out there who yearns to pursue a spiritual life but feels excluded from what has come to be known as Christianity in this country, please know that there is a place for you.