Judgment Seat of Christ

It is common among evangelicals to separate the "judgment seat of Christ" (as used by Paul in 2 Corinthians 5:10) from the last, Great White Throne judgment. The logic of this separation is backed up by the concept stated in Romans 8:1 that in Christ there is no condemnation, so that the "judgment seat of Christ" must be a sort of sham kangaroo court for Christians where no judgment is really rendered. The Great White Throne judgment is for non-Christians, where the judgment is always in the negative.

I think there are at least three devastating arguments against this separation.
Argument 1: Analysis of Romans 8:1
This argument undercuts most of the rationale for having two separate judgments. In Romans 8:1, Paul says that "There is now then no condemnation to the ones in Christ Jesus." The key to this verse is the phrase "in Christ". To be "in Christ" for Paul is to be incorporated with Christ so as to share things that are of Christ. A natural reading of Romans 8 would be to take this "in Christ" as a sort of eschatological ideal. Those who walk in the Spirit are those "in Christ". However, we are not told if there is any tension within a person that doesn't totally walk in the Spirit but also walks in the flesh. It is in this double walking case, which includes everyone, and not the eschatological ideal of Romans 8:1, that calls for judgment.

Argument 2: Romans 14:10
This argument relies on a sister-wording "judgment seat of God" which in context clearly includes Christians. Therefore, the special wording "judgment seat of Christ" may not be of much significance. This reminds me of an error Mormans make in interpreting the doublets of Hebrew poetry. Just because there are two different words used (for example: "Zion" and "Jerusalem"), does not mean that two different locations are in mind.

Argument 3: Jesus' Parables do not allude to a Kangaroo Court
When Jesus speaks of judgment, it always seems to involve one process. A prime example of this is the parable of the wheat and weeds in Matthew 13:24-30 where clearly one judgment is in mind.

I believe these arguments show that the "judgment seat of Christ" as a sham judgment is itself a sham. It is motivated by a theological picture that ignores any mention of good/bad works and how that is judged.