Where could He possibly Justify (in the Judicial sense) letting off the wicked and excusing their crime?
That IS my question, after all!
Oh. I was confused, I suppose. If this was, in fact, your original question, it was buried under an enormity of other issues which have little or nothing to do with the question you are actually asking. I thought your question must have been one of these:
On what basis did GOD SO LOVE the world? On what values contained by man, the sinner?
What possibly JUST cause is there for God to LOVE what is repugnant to him?
I ask again. ON WHAT BASIS can God be said to "LOVE THE WORLD"?
Man is the sinner and does NOT pay. Jesus is perfect and sinless and DOES pay. JUSTICE? How? LOVE? On what basis?
This new question is easy to explain. The verse you at first quote correctly holds the seed of understanding the answer to your question, if, in fact, you have narrowed your question down to this new one. God loved the world of mankind enough to pay for our sins. You ask, "Where could He possibly Justify (in the Judicial sense) letting off the wicked and excusing their crime?" The answer is, He couldn't, and the Bible never suggests that he could or did. The crimes had to be paid for.
I'm sure you already know how the Bible says those crimes were paid for. Now, if your REAL question is in that jumble of poorly based, maundering questions you asked in your opening post, you need to firm your questions up a bit to get them answered. In the opening post you seem to be blathering against the concept of a loving or just God and appear to be disproving the possibility even as you ask (presumably believers) whether such love and justice is possible.
Since you wish to use the analogy of human courts, does the responsible party always pay? If not, your analogy can be used to demonstrate the answer to your question just as easily as to demonstrate your dilema. For instance, if my young, inexperienced child damages someone's property, who pays for it? Is that just or fair?
Your questions only make sense from the perspective of a cynical critic. You asserted an initial fallacious framework of thought within which your pejorative questions seem reasonable.
It is just and merciful for God to determine what is a reasonable price for the damage done to his property and demand payment of that price. It is supremely merciful and loving for Jesus to willingly choose to pay the price and become our debt-holder, only to release us from obligation to that debt (as the only one who could do so) because of his fondness for us and his desire to see us achieve our potential.
Where the price has been paid in sufficient amount to cover all damages in perpetuity, there is no more injustice in excusing the criminal or the crime and clemency (mercy) can, from that time onward, always be granted on that basis at the judge's discretion. From that time onward there is no longer any grounds on which to question whether the judge should or should not grant clemency in any specific instance.
Now, if that IS your question, I hope I answered it fully. If you have a different question than the one about which you so recently wrote: "That IS my question, after all!" please clarify that question separately.