The Perrys announced Monday the addition of Scott Brand as lead singer and new baritone Austin Olvey.
Scott, a native of Lineville, Alabama, is a former member of Gold City and has toured with Ernie Dawson and Heirline.
“Libbi and I have been friends a long time and it’s a great honor to not only be apart of a 50 year old rich legacy but be on stage with one of the greatest voices that has ever stepped on a gospel stage! The future is very bright and I’m looking forward to what God has planned for me and for The Perrys,” said Scott.
Austin is from Chattagnooga, TN. He says he’s always dreamed of singing with a group like the Perrys since he was a child.
“The Bible says, if you delight yuorself in the Lord, He will give you the desires of your heart. He is faithful and has kept His promises,” said Austin.
The first date with the new members is August 6 in the US.
Texas Gospel Canada does not own this material. These are links to a two-part podcast we thought you might find interesting. Questions about the program should be directed to the content owner. The contact information is within the linked pages.
Christopher Hitchens wrote, “What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence.” Hitchens was speaking of God. While I have never disagreed with the logic of his statement, I do disagree with his presupposition that millions of people having the same experience is not evidence worth exploring. I also disagree with the apparent presupposition that evidence and proof are the same thing. These presuppositions leave Hitchens’ Razor a bit rusty.
There is a very big difference between lack of evidence and rejection of evidence. A person who knows something because of his or her experience may not be able to prove it to me. Their experience is no less evidence than testimony in a courtroom. One person’s experience is very weak evidence. But if millions of others report the same experience, it shouldn’t be dismissed so easily. A good example would be that I can never know what it’s like to be an African American woman. She may describe to me what it feels like to be the target of discrimination, she may show me data that indicates she has been discriminated against, but I will never KNOW what it’s like to have that experience. All I can know is her (and other’s) testimony. And it would be wrong for me to presuppose that her experience must be a delusion; and therefore, something to be dismissed without investigation. Millions of people having the same experience is evidence worth exploring, but not proof. Proof is something totally different.
There is a big difference between proof and evidence. We certainly wouldn’t spend billions of dollars on the search for extraterrestrial life if evidence and proof were the same thing. Conditions are what we would expect them to be if there is life on other planets; Therefore, we search for life based on this evidence. Oxford says evidence is, “The AVAILABLE body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid.” Evidence remains evidence unless it is proven or demonstrated to be the result of a rival causal factor.
I have no way to prove God’s presence or absence if the only way to know Him is through a faith given as a gift to those who will accept it. It would not be rational to claim that those who say they have this experience are mistaken unless I can demonstrate a rival cause for their experience. Oddly enough, if one “believes” that other people’s faith is just wishful thinking then they too have a faith unless they can prove the other’s are in error. Let me be very clear here: I did not say the other people’s faith is true because I cannot claim it to be false. I said the proposition that their faith must be false because they cannot prove it is not rational. The only rational claim in that situation would be, “I don’t know.”
There are three words that I think are thrown around too often today. They are “God told me.”
I’ve had people tell me that God told them a certain politician would win an election or that God revealed some secret to them. One man told me years ago that God revealed to him that he would own the radio station at which I worked. None of these things came to pass.
Deuteronomy tells us something I would think is obvious: if what a prophet proclaims in the name of the Lord does not take place…that is a message the Lord has not spoken. And 2 Peter has a stern warning for those who falsely proclaim things in the name of God.
Do you keep on guard for those who appear to be speaking God’s word, but only deceive others, and quite possibly themselves as well?
An atheist writer wrote that he honestly attempted to believe in God but ultimately found that the evidence did not stack up. I believe woven into his words is the reason he failed.
Ephesians tells us, “…it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— not by works, so that no one can boast.” Doesn’t this tell us that attempts to try to believe in God, or lean on our own understanding to form an argument for God are doomed to fail if saving faith is the goal?
James tells us if your motives are wrong, you won’t receive. There’s a difference between testing God, and seeking Him. Could this be the reason some folks who are rich in intellect allow their own understanding to become a stumbling block?