A few general points:

1. I agree this is a real issue and we don’t have all the answers.
2. If God is God, then ultimately He is the Judge, not you or I.
3. Where do you get your moral views from? e.g. on what basis do you (House) say that slavery is wrong?

A few specific comments:
1. It’s not true that the NT is silent or neutral on slavery. Paul’s commands to slave-owners radically shifts the whole dynamic of slave-owner relationships, e.g. Col.4:1; Eph.6:9; Philemon. Paul approved of slaves gaining freedom (1 Cor.7:21-22). He condemned slave-trading (1 Tim.1:10 ESV). But he had to work in a context where everyone approved of slavery and abolitionism was not an option; moreover, blanket manumission generally left ex-slaves worse off in that world. I’m sure you know that one of the main causes of abolition was pressure from evangelical Christians like Wilberforce who saw that the Bible clearly was pointing in that direction.
2. I would have thought that racial superiority was the main defence of genocide, e.g. Nazis.
3. If the Bible was “re written to justify the actions of various religious believers and leaders throughout its history”, all I can say is they didn’t do a very good job. e.g. Israel’s most famous and venerated king commits adultery, murder, abuse of power, etc.; the so-called first pope (Peter) regularly “puts his foot in his mouth”, is rebuked as Satan by Jesus, denies him 3 times, is rebuked strongly by Paul.

New Christian Synonym #5734 Genocide is a Police Action.

Your claim of WW2 being a modern equivalent only works if you mean the Israelites and the Nazis are performing the same god given “work”. Both peoples proclaimed they were doing the will of god. Only the Allies stopped the Nazis from continuing with Genocide. Please note after victory we didn’t depopulate the country of Germany and put the everyone to death for their crimes.

The Canaanite babies & women and children must have truly been horrific little monsters. Do you have any examples of these terrible terrible crimes so deserving of death apart from the circular reasoning of a book that asserts it was ok to kill them anyway because they must have been evil and god wouldn’t do evil things?

“1b. Slavery in the OT is an existing practice that God’s laws sought to regulate and bring justice to until the coming of Christ, when people were capable of better things through the Spirit.”

You might have a point if New Testament actually backed up what you said. It’s funny that nowhere in there did anyone, Jesus included, ever speak out against slavery. There’s plenty of words praising slavery as an example of some hierarchical ideal.
http://www.religioustolerance.org/sla_bibl2.htm

“It was more a case of labour to pay off debts.”

So then you DO AGREE it’s OK to own slaves as long as you do it the same way ancient jews did.

2. I guess we can let Hitler & the Nazi’s off the hook too because they didn’t kill All the Jews.

3. “3. Not sure what I said to cause this reaction” Seriously?
You mentioned racial superiority as a invalid argument for defending genocide. I said I’ve never heard of anyone seriously offering up racial superiority as a defense for genocide. You must move move in darker circles than I do to have heard such a defense and need to offer an argument against it.

4. Or a more likely answer: The bible is a mish-mash of legendary and mythical events passed down through at first oral history and written and re written to justify the actions of various religious believers and leaders throughout its history.

Sorry I’ve taken so long to respond to your comments. I’ve been having computer/internet trouble, etc.

To pick up on your thoughtful comments:

1a. My point was that this was a special case that called for strong “police action.” I suppose the war with Hitler is the nearest modern equivalent. The Canaanites were themselves committing vile acts and had had time to repent, but had failed to do so. God as Judge has the right to pronounce sentence.
1b. Slavery in the OT is an existing practice that God’s laws sought to regulate and bring justice to until the coming of Christ, when people were capable of better things through the Spirit. Jesus made a similar observation about divorce in Matt.19: it was permitted only because of “your hardness of heart.” You also need to remember that OT slavery was nothing like that in the Greco-Roman world or the black slave trade in more recent times. It was more a case of labour to pay off debts.
2. My comments in 1a probably cover this. By the way, large numbers of Canaanites did survive and cause trouble for Israel.
3. Not sure what I said to cause this reaction. I specifically denied that racial superiority was a grounds for Joshua having to kill the Canaanites. God was impartial and evicted the Israelites several times because of their injustice and idolatry.
4. Your comment sounds like spin. I think my comment on 1b may answer this point too. The Bible is a narrative of redemption: it portrays humanity as going very badly wrong and being restored step by step. Hence the OT Israelites weren’t capable of changing 100% from their own “pagan” past, so God restrained their wicked urges until they were ready for the “new covenant.”

Anyway if I have misunderstood any of your points, feel free to clarify them for me

1b. The bible also gives clear rules for the treatment of slaves. Is it ok to own people as long as we do it the way ancient jews did?

2. Immoral actions are justified as long as your targets have performed Immoral actions? Good thing the Canaanites didn’t survive to use the same “Morallity” as the Israelites

3. I’ve never heard anyone offer up supposed racial superiority as an argument for genocide in the Bible. You must move in darker circles than I do.

4. So god is only Moral when it’s convenient? It’s funny how gods morality changes with the times and people almost as if god doesn’t exist and is just a reflection of the times and prejudices of its believers.

Love your blog! I guess I’d love for you to explain what you think Christ is coming back to do?

In Acts 1:6-8 the disciples ask Jesus point blank, “are you now going to restore the Kingdom to Israel?” to which He responds by saying “It is not for you to know the times and dates the Father has set by His own authority. But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes upon you and you will be my witnesses…” etc.

To me this conversation clearly rules out a metaphoric Kingdom that is occurring now, Jesus is plainly saying, “no the the time of the Kingdom is not not your concern , instead I need you to be my witnesses through the power of the Holy Spirit…” It also makes a Kingdom that arises out of the Spirit’s work of creating a glorious church seem unlikely as well, because Jesus seems to be contrasting the two ideas of Kingdom and Holy Spirit Witnessing.

So is your view that He coming back to restore a Kingdom? Or is He just coming back to judge and then get straight into making the new heavens and new earth? Or I am way off?

Not only does this give opportunity for people to scoff at the seriousness of biblical scripture ‘God’s Word’ but is also destroying people’s lives as well.

I pray that even through all this silly nonsense, that God will turn this around for good of all involved, even those giving up their homes and property thinking that the world is ending.

As human beings we sometimes forget the real reazon God left us here on earth and use up the little time we have concentrating on details that don’t matter… After all if they did, wouldn’t God have included them in His Word!

Anyways, Greatly put Jon! keep up the great work…