Hey there my friend,
I can't tell you how much I appreciate your frank speech. It makes these conversations very interesting, fruitful, and valuable.
The first thing we need to acknowledge is that you and I stand on absolutely equal footing when you say "You have at your disposal, nothing more than your internal standard of morality, your limited powers of reason and your finite grasp of knowledge." You are a man just like me. You have a finite grasp of knowledge just like me. You have no demonstrable "power of reason" beyond mine. We are equally human and limited. This is why your charge of arrogance applies equally to you when you use your own fallible judgment to assert that the Bible as speaking truly about God. What if you are wrong and some ignorant or wicked man put falsehoods in the Bible? If you use your limited judgment and attribute those falsehoods to God then you are committing a gross blasphemy. The sword of truth cuts both ways my friend.
Now on to your specific points:
There is no more debate about the age of the earth than there is about its geometry. It is an oblate spheroid about 4.5 billion years old. These facts are based on the consilience of all science - chemistry, physics, astronomy, geology, biology, evolution. It is this consilience, this unity of knowledge, that makes it impossible to pick out and reject bits and pieces of science that contradict the Biblical account. Each part of science is inextricably interwoven with all the rest. Truth is unified.
"I'm also open to alternate interpretation possibilities of the Bible." Me too! I know that much of the Bible has been misinterpreted in the most ridiculous ways. Things that are obviously figures of speech are taken as literal, and things that are literal are explained away when they contradict preferred doctrines. That's why the Bible fails as a guide to anyone. It all depends upon our own fallible interpretations and there is no objective test to discern between the true and the false. Folks have nothing to go on but their interpretation of words, words, and more words. And those words were written thousands of years ago by cultures very different than ours and in languages few understand.
"You say you reject the Bible due to passages wherein God orders the execution of humans." I've never had any problem with God commanding the execution of known criminals. My problem is with merciless brutal GENOCIDE commanded by God. The slaughter of men, women, and innocent babies, coupled with the command to preserver 32,000 virgins which were distributed to the soldiers is a moral abomination. And you have never answered why the god of the Israelites "just happens" to emulate the brutal Bronze age tribal war gods common from that time. Is the logical answer simply too obvious for you to touch?
"and then go even further in such ruthless self confidence by declaring Him barbaric and unfair." Your description of me as "ruthless" makes no sense in that sentence. Indeed, it is quite ironic given that it means "having or showing no pity or compassion for others" which is exactly what the God of the Bible commanded his people to be. It doesn't matter if you think God was justified in ordering their destruction, you cannot deny that his actions were "ruthless" by definition.
"On what basis do you convict Him of immorality?" On the basis of the universal moral standards understood by everyone except religious fundamentalists and psychopaths. That's the great irony of the Christian argument that there would be no objective morality without the God of the Bible. It is the Bible that destroys and corrupts the innate moral sense of humanity. The atheist Hector Alvaros had no hesitation to reject Infanticide, Genocide, and Slavery as immoral. His Christian opponent could not agree because God had ordered those things, so they can't be immoral. This is why I say that fundamentalist religion corrupts both the minds and the morals of those who adhere to it.
"What rule of man constrains Him from taking any life which He has already sentenced to death?" The problem is that God did not do the "taking" of the Canaanites lives. If he had done that, I wouldn't be pressing my complaint. Have I ever said the flood was immoral? Nope. It may be, but it's an entirely different case and the answer is not obvious so I don't press it.
There is no difference between you and I on this issue. You have nothing to go on different than I, unless you think your unsupportable presuppositions constitute authentic knowledge.
"a lack of humility and attempt to use them as evidence in a case to convict the Creator of the Universe." Two problems: First, who is more arrogant: A man who says that the true God could not commit the moral abominations attributed to him in the Bible, or the man who asserts without proof or reason that the Bible is true no matter what it says? You have set yourself us as an arbitrary judge when you declare that you know that the Bible is the true word of the true God. What gives you that right or that power?
Second, I am not trying to convict the Creator of the Universe. On the contrary, I am defending him from the slander against him in the Bible. Think of me as his lawyer. He's gotten a bad rap.
"You seem critical of others who are reluctant to follow your path of logic and reason, and yet, you yourself are not even sure where it leads." Of course I don't know where it leads. No one has that knowledge. Are you suggesting that I must know everything to have an opinion about anything?
"Are you blazing a new trail that generations of men before you have not already trodden?" That's an ironic question coming from someone who does nothing but follow in the footsteps of others.
"One thing is certain, your quest will end in the same way of the others who came before you, in the grave. And then what? Tell us if you know." I'm glad you stated the truth. Your path will end in the grave exactly like that of every other person who has ever lived. What comes after that is anyone's guess. If there were any certain knowledge that could be verified, we wouldn't be having this debate, would we?
Great chatting my friend. And again, I really appreciate your frank speech. It really clears the air and makes for very fruitful discourse.