The three part series, written by Paul Seely, explores the scientific validity of the Flood in Genesis. He offers the approximate date of the flood according to Scripture, and then looks at various lines of evidence that contradict the idea of a global flood at that time. In light of other Mesopotamian flood stories, scholars conclude that the flood was local at best. In the end, he suggests that this story primarily reveals theological truths from a limited scientific understanding of natural events.
  • The Flood: Not Global, Barely Local, Mostly Theological, Pt 1

    | Paul Seely
    Blog Post
    The Flood: Not Global, Barely Local, Mostly Theological, Pt 1 | Paul Seely

    Before considering the scientific data, we must first determine a rough earliest probable date for the Flood. If the Flood is an actual historical event, it must touch down in... Read More >

    Going Deeper PART 1 of 3
  • The Flood: Not Global, Barely Local, Mostly Theological, Pt 2

    | Paul Seely
    Blog Post
    The Flood: Not Global, Barely Local, Mostly Theological, Pt 2 | Paul Seely

        There are so many similarities between the biblical Flood account and the Mesopotamian accounts that many conservative scholars have concluded that they go back to a... Read More >

    Going Deeper PART 2 of 3
  • The Flood: Not Global, Barely Local, Mostly Theological, Pt 3

    | Paul Seely
    Blog Post
    The Flood: Not Global, Barely Local, Mostly Theological, Pt 3 | Paul Seely

    Unfortunately, there is no single word to my knowledge that could accurately categorize the Genesis Flood account. Parabolic Legend is the best I can do... Read More >

    Going Deeper PART 3 of 3