Dear Pilgrim.
Answers to your post are:
Your 1st point) No.
2nd point)It shouldn't be a problem between us, I hope, so no (particularly if you consider this post as a whole)
3rd point) Your definition makes sense. It is not for us to declare anyone 'not guilty'of transgressions.
4th point)In answer to the 2nd Qu. Absolutely not, sometimes needed to illustrate that they like us all are guilty. In answer to the 3rd Qu. Not sure, are you?
5th point) 1st Qu. The man left disappointed and probably angry and that is no less than what we should expect when we preach. To the natural man Christ is a failure because He doesn't answer their desires he finds His command too much.
Your very last sentence: 100% agree.

Regards.

To draw a parallel: if we had a friend that we knew was dying of cancer and we kept on at him to take the medicine that could cure him but we didn't tell him first he had the disease, we shouldn't be surprised if he refused to take it. We can and should 'use' the law to convict hearers of our preaching of their guilt. I believe Paul more or less stated that that would be a correct use of the Law in his writings.