Bema Seat judgement

[Pastor_Jim]

For the second time in about a week, a Catholic has told me that he does not believe in the Bema Seat Judgement.

Is this a common view among Catholics?

 

[mlchance]

One need not be Catholic to question the validity of an idea which appears to distort Scripture. For example:

mountainretreatorg.net/faq/bema.html

– Mark L. Chance.

 

[Pastor_Jim]

One need not be Catholic to question the validity of an idea which appears to distort Scripture.

How do you feel that it distorts scripture?

 

[JenDid]

One need not be Catholic to question the validity of an idea which appears to distort Scripture. For example:

mountainretreatorg.net/faq/bema.html

– Mark L. Chance.

Thanks for the website. I’ve never heard of that term.

In Christ,
Jennifer

 

[puzzleannie]

linked article answers your question

what Catholics do believe in is the particular judgment at the moment of death, in which God give us all knowledge we need, of Himself and of the realities of heaven and hell, and of our own sins, to make our choice of destination for all eternity, acceptance or rejection of His Love.

and we believe in the general judgment at the end of time as described in Matthew 25, the judgement of the nations, where we will most definitely be judged on our works, feeding the hungry etc. Since after death we are in eternity, no longer bound by time, there is not really a temporal gap between the two.

 

[Pastor_Jim]

linked article answers your question

Did mlchance write the article?

what Catholics do believe in is the particular judgment at the moment of death, in which God give us all knowledge we need, of Himself and of the realities of heaven and hell, and of our own sins, to make our choice of destination for all eternity, acceptance or rejection of His Love.

I notice you were unable to provide a verse for this.

no that is not what the article says. did you read it?

No. I asked him to explain why he believes it’s wrong, not for somebody else’s opinion.

it explains the words you chose in OP and explains why those words have been misinterpreted, using biblical resources./

OK. So then, you’re saying that 1 Corinthians 5:10 doesn’t really say “For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad”?

Please explain how you would interpret that and why your interpretation is correct.

 

[puzzleannie]

no that is not what the article says. did you read it?

it explains the words you chose in OP and explains why those words have been misinterpreted, using biblical resources.

 

[Contarini]

For the second time in about a week, a Catholic has told me that he does not believe in the Bema Seat Judgement.

Is this a common view among Catholics?

The “Bema Seat Judgment” as something distinct from the Last Judgment we all know about is an odd dispensationalist invention, created to cover the plain conflict between your soteriology and the teaching of Scripture. (Your belief in a “Rapture” that precedes the actual Second Coming of Christ is similarly an idiosyncratic and unnecessary distortion of Scripture.) Not only don’t Catholics or Orthodox believe in it, no Protestants that I know of believed in it until the late 19th century at the earliest, and many, perhaps most worldwide, still don’t.

Edwin

 

[Contarini]

OK. So then, you’re saying that 1 Corinthians 5:10 doesn’t really say “For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad”?

Please explain how you would interpret that and why your interpretation is correct.

It’s speaking of the Last Judgment. The one and only Last Judgment (what you would call the “Great White Throne Judgment.”) You can’t stand to admit the idea that Christians will be judged according to their works along with everyone else, even though that’s the plain meaning of Scripture and the teaching of all Christians until the rise of dispensationalism (yes, the Reformers taught this as well).

Edwin

 

[Pastor_Jim]

It’s speaking of the Last Judgment. The one and only Last Judgment (what you would call the “Great White Throne Judgment.”)

First of all, there are two judgements: the White Throne Judgement and the Bema Seat Judgement.

Second, I would never be so stupid as to confuse the Bema Seat Judgement with the White Throne Judgement.

You can’t stand to admit the idea that Christians will be judged according to their works along with everyone else, even though that’s the plain meaning of Scripture and the teaching of all Christians until the rise of dispensationalism (yes, the Reformers taught this as well).

Right. I can’t stand it. In fact, I can’t stand it so much that I’m defending scripture that teaches it.

The “Bema Seat Judgment” as something distinct from the Last Judgment we all know about is an odd dispensationalist invention

So when do you believe that the dispensationalists invented 1 Cor 5:10?

 

[Contarini]

First of all, there are two judgements: the White Throne Judgement and the Bema Seat Judgement.

Second, I would never be so stupid as to confuse the Bema Seat Judgement with the White Throne Judgement.

Why would this be stupid? Where in Scripture do you find even a hint that these are two separate judgments?

Right. I can’t stand it. In fact, I can’t stand it so much that I’m defending scripture that teaches it.

I was always taught that the “Bema Seat Judgment” is only for believers, and is distinct from the Great White Throne Judgment. Isn’t that what you believe? The question is, why? And the historical answer is: because dispensationalists couldn’t stand the idea that 2 Cor. 5:10 and similar passages were referring to the Great White Throne Judgment (because it violated their extreme version of “justification by faith alone”) and so they invented the idea that the “judgment seat of Christ” is something separate.

So when do you believe that the dispensationalists invented 1 Cor 5:10?

They invented the idea that 1 Cor. 5:10 is referring to something other than the “Great White Throne” Judgment.

Edwin

 

[Pastor_Jim]

Why would this be stupid? Where in Scripture do you find even a hint that these are two separate judgments?

We see the Bema Judgement in Cor 5:10 and the White Throne Judgement in Rev 20:11-15.

Isn’t that what you believe? The question is, why?

Because that’s what the Bible says.

They invented the idea that 1 Cor. 5:10 is referring to something other than the “Great White Throne” Judgment.

First of all, if it’s not referring to the Bema Seat Judgement, then why does it say BEMA???

Second, are you saying that there will be born again believers at the White Throne Judgement?

 

[Dan-Man916]

So when do you believe that the dispensationalists invented 1 Cor 5:10?

Dispensationalists don’t invent scripture, but they do invent heretical interpretations of scripture.

That is the distinction you fail to make.

 

[Contarini]

We see the Bema Judgement in Cor 5:10 and the White Throne Judgement in Rev 20:11-15.

Because that’s what the Bible says.

First of all, if it’s not referring to the Bema Seat Judgement, then why does it say BEMA???

A “bema” is the seat or bench on which a judge sits. It’s just another name for what Rev. 20 calls the “Great White Throne.”

And why do you insist on using the Greek word? Ever thought about this? It gives the impression that this must be a unique event because, after all, it has a proper name. It creates mystification. In fact all 2 Cor. 5:10 is talking about is the seat a judge sits on. There is no reason whatever to distinguish the “Bema” from the “Great White Throne.”

Second, are you saying that there will be born again believers at the White Throne Judgement?

Certainly. Why not? That’s the plain sense of Scripture and the uniform belief of Christians until the rise of dispensationalism and its foolish notion of “dividing the Scriptures” (yes, you think you are “rightly” dividing them, but I strongly disagree–you’re chopping them up into separate bits so you can deny the meaning that they have if you take them as a whole). Rev. 20:12 says that the “dead” are called before the Great White Throne. And I know from a separate thread that you think born-again believers who have gone to be with the Lord are included among the “dead”! Nowhere does Rev. 20:12 suggest that only those who are not regenerate are called to this judgment. In fact, v. 15 strongly implies otherwise, by saying that those who are not written in the Book of Life are thrown into the lake of fire. That implies that some among the “dead” are written in the Book of Life. (I suppose you could pull another dispensationalist trick and tell me that these are Jewish believers who died in the Tribulation, but I shouldn’t anticipate–I’ll wait and see what you actually do say!)

Edwin

 

[Pastor_Jim]

A “bema” is the seat or bench on which a judge sits. It’s just another name for what Rev. 20 calls the “Great White Throne.”

Actually, Rev 20 calls the White Throne leukos thronos, not bema.

 

[trrocks03]

First of all, if it’s not referring to the Bema Seat Judgement, then why does it say BEMA???

Like many other posters indicated, it means “seat that is elevated” above the rest. Similar to what a Throne would be like. There is no Bema Seat Judgement, it was made up and does not link back to the ECF. Do you have any proof that the Bema Seat Judgement was believed by anyone before the year 1500? Source would be helpful. Thanks.

 

[trrocks03]

Actually, Rev 20 calls the White Throne leukos thronos, not bema.

Again, we get to the nitty gritty and take the bible literally in some areas (when discussing a seat description), but not in other areas (John 6)

 

[Pastor_Jim]

Like many other posters indicated, it means “seat that is elevated” above the rest. Similar to what a Throne would be like. There is no Bema Seat Judgement, it was made up

Really? Do you have any evidence that 2 Corinthians 5:10 is “made up”?

Do you have any proof that the Bema Seat Judgement was believed by anyone before the year 1500? Source would be helpful.

Again, you misunderstand. It doesn’t matter if everybody believed it or if nobody believed it. The Bible teaches it.

 

[Contarini]

Actually, Rev 20 calls the White Throne leukos thronos, not bema.

Are you committing yourself to the view that whenever the same thing is spoken of, the Greek text uses the same words? Do you really think you can make this stick throughout all of Scripture? Any time there are two different words, two completely different things are spoken of? And conversely, any time the same word(s) are used, the same thing is meant?

If you aren’t committed to maintaining this in general, why should this be the case here? We are dealing with two different passages in different NT books. Why shouldn’t Paul and John (whichever “John” wrote Revelation. . . . ) have used different words to talk about the same thing?

I repeat: a “bema” is simply a raised seat on which a public official such as a judge sits. There is no reason whatever why a “leukos thronos” couldn’t also be referred to as a “bema.” That is the most obvious interpretation, and the one that all Christians held until one particular extreme faction within modern Protestantism decided that their theology required them not to.

Edwin

 

[Contarini]

Like many other posters indicated, it means “seat that is elevated” above the rest. Similar to what a Throne would be like. There is no Bema Seat Judgement, it was made up and does not link back to the ECF. Do you have any proof that the Bema Seat Judgement was believed by anyone before the year 1500? Source would be helpful. Thanks.

Do you have proof that it was believed by anyone in the sixteenth century?

Edwin