Wow.
I don't mean to be mean, but I think that you're wrong on the logical end on several points.
Particularly about the "single competent apologetic."
First, if the Christian God is Who we believe He is, then we can't place our standards of good and evil upon what He does, because HE'S the one that gets to define it. That's the core problem that I see in most non-Christian critiques - it's the placement of human standards upon God and not the other way around.
Second, He WOULD be Holy and Perfect - and for Him to allow imperfection to exist without finding an answer for it would be creating a lie. The concept here is that evil cannot be "balanced" because it would still be there. It must be done away with.
It is not "evil" to judge someone for being even the slightest imperfect when you are completely and totally blameless and define perfection simply by BEING. Such an act would uphold the lie that imperfection is okay, when it isn't.
That is why eternal judgment is NOT evil - it is JUST because it is what is DESERVED.
Hence the need for the Cross and Atonement and "all that." The defeat of Evil requires a sacrifice that takes all that evil upon itself.
The above is more or less the central point of Christianity - that even the slightest bit of evil deserves punishment. Say what you will about the rest of the Bible and proofs of archaeology and the rest of the debate - but you are wrong here about the nature and character of God and Who we say He is.