Welp, I've really got no choice but to correct Joel Berry's sodomizing of church history in this post. The sheer absurdity in the OP makes correcting these Judeo-Christian lies downright obligatory. First, no serious theologian would claim that Dispensationalism predates Darby or the 19th-century progenitors of this doctrine. The Dispensationalists themselves acknowledged that it was new to Christian history. Its opponents acknowledged it was new. That was the #1 reason people opposed it, and Dispies didn't really argue otherwise. Everyone knows this. Why? We know exactly who invented Dispensationalism and when. It was a sectarian Irish doomsday cult called the Plymouth Brethren, and their leader, John Nelson Darby. It spawned in 1827 during the heretical Restorationist Movement - along with Mormonism, Jehovah's Witnesses, and Seventh-day Adventists - and absolutely no one suggested that these were "rediscovered" doctrines. As you'll see below, Dispensationalists admitted it. To make this utterly asinine claim that Dispensationalism predates Darby, Judeo-Christians like Berry often point to Historic Premillennialists, like the Church Fathers, and conflate eschatological futurism with Darby's doctrines. Never mind them. They're retarded. Believing that Jews will be restored to an earthly kingdom at some point in the future, after being mass-converted to Christianity or during the millennial reign, is not new. It's also not Dispensationalism. That's never been the controversy. The controversy is related to the following Dispensational distinctives: 1. Their claim that Jews remain in Covenant with God, even without faith in Jesus. Essentially, Dispensationalism hangs on the idea that God shows favoritism to Jews based upon their ethnic lineage. That's new. That's the BIG one, it's utterly heretical, and no one believed this before Darby. Nobody. You can't find it in the pages of Christian history, because that's a denial of the exclusivity of Christ and flatly contradictory to the Holy Bible. 2. Their claim that Christians are not entitled to all the promises made to Abraham on account of being his authentic spiritual heirs. The Dispensationalists claim that some of Abraham's promises are exclusively for Jews, despite their unbelief. This is new. 3. Their claim that Jewish nationhood, prior to their mass conversion, is Biblical and a fulfillment of prophecy. This is new. That's Dispensationalism in a nutshell, and the convoluted doctrinal inventions it required, like the imminent rapture, were completely new in church history. Drawing seven distinct dispensations and rejecting some form of Covenant Theology was also new. Believing Jews had a Covenant with God that Christian Gentiles do not was completely new. Brady Schwertley writes that “The Plymouth Brethren openly admitted and were even proud of the fact that among their teachings were totally new ones.” Dave MacPherson writes that “Early disciples of [Dispensationalism] often called it a new doctrine.” Yeah, like, all of them. Oswald T. Allis, cofounder of Westminster Theological Seminary, said of Dispensationalism, “It is generally agreed that the Dispensational teaching of the Brethren was something entirely new.” No kidding. That's putting it mildly. James Orr, a leading evangelical theologian at the turn of the twentieth century and a contributor to The Fundamentals, classified Dispensational theology as “a novel hypothesis” and said, “No such doctrine of the church and Israel has ever been held in Christendom before this century.” Charles Spurgeon, when asked about Dispensationalism, said, “We hold to no new views concerning the future, and we have no desire for any." Ouch. W. G. Moorehead, a Presbyterian scholar writing at the dawn of the Scofield era, issued his own sharp warning. Moorehead wrote, “The Dispensational scheme is a modern construction, unknown to the Reformers and unknown to the early Church.” But those are critics. What about proponents? Glad you asked. William Kelly, one of Darby’s own followers and editors, admitted that Darby’s prophetic scheme “cannot claim the sanction of antiquity” and that it represented “an interpretation unknown to the Church until recent years." Samuel Prideaux Tregelles, one of the nineteenth century's greatest textual critics, was associated with the Plymouth Brethren and Darby, once a member. He said, “I am not aware that any writer, from the Apostles downward, has ever asserted such a view. The system is absolutely new.” Again. Literally everyone acknowledged this. That's why it was so controversial. Orthodoxy isn't controversial. New ideas are. Joel Berry is full of ahistorical poppycock. Dispensationalism is several generations newer than the United States. Meanwhile, his absurd suggestion that Dispensationalism is just a literal, plain view of Scripture is laughable. Do you know what played a significant role in spreading this new theory? The most intricate charts you have ever seen, giving people a necessary visual for how the scheme is held together by duct tape and baling wire. Nobody can see it in the Scripture. It takes charts, roughly twelve thousand footnotes in Scofield's Bible, and the most complicated, convoluted X-ray goggles you've ever seen. That is why Dispensationalism didn't spread far until the Scofield Bible. The Zionists at Oxford, who owned and published the Bible with their patsy's name on the cover, literally had to make a Bible with thousands of notes, all designed to make Dispensationalism believable. It's basically the equivalent of the "Charlie Meme" from Always Sunny, with red lines connecting newspaper articles on the wall behind him. Nobody is reading the Bible and walking away with Dispensational precepts, which is why the church went roughly 1800 years without anyone doing so. Look at the Dispensational charts I've provided. I'm sure you notice how complicated this insane system is. Does it look like the "plain reading of Scripture?" Lol, no. But if you look closely, you'll see that ALL Dispensationalists taught that Jews would return to Israel only AFTER a mass conversion, as the millennial reign began. NOBODY called a return of Jews to Palestine BEFORE their conversion. That was invented AFTER 1948. That means not only is Dispensationalism less than 200 years old, but Joel Berry does not observe Dispensationalism 1.0. Joel Berry observes Dispensationalism 2.0, which emerged roughly between 1948 and 1968. HIS version of Dispensationalism, in which Jews are given a nation by God despite still denying Christ, is roughly the same age as the moon landing. Scofield had to be rewritten and edited after 1948. All the prophecy charts had to change. The timeline had to be adjusted. Major Dispensational doctrines had to be revised. THAT is Joel Berry's Dispensationalism - younger than your grandpa. So, how do they have the audacity to claim it's older? First, some, like Berry, absolutely know better. But, they lie because - like Berry - they work for the Israel Lobby and are trying to use Christianity to manipulate you. Others are just dumb. They try to sell this lie by intentionally conflating the novel doctrines of John Nelson Darby with Historic Premillennialism. The two are very different things. Historic Premillennialists (like myself) have always held that God will one day save the Jews, as conditioned upon the Abrahamic Promise in Genesis 12:4, which promises that ALL nations of the Earth will be redeemed one day, through Christ. But they deny that Jews have any kind of special Covenant promises uniquely for them. We have always held that God is not done with ethnic Jews. But we have ALWAYS denied that Jews, outside faith in Christ, are entitled to even one of Abraham's promises, whether land or Covenant redemption. This is why literally everyone acknowledged Dispensationalism was new. It was. Now, regarding Berry's claim that it's not a heresy, that's also flatly untrue. Scofield, for example, claimed that there are four gospels, and our gospel (the True one) will be discontinued, and one day, people will be saved again by the Law. Of course, they edited that out of Scofield in 1917, but that's just one example of clearly heretical notions required to make the complicated prophecy chart religion work. The central heresy of Dispensationalism is Dual Covenant Theology - which ALL Dispensationalists hold to, whether they admit it or not. It's not just John Hagee. The concept is that God has TWO chosen peoples, TWO Covenants, separated by ethnicity. They believe that God has a Covenant of Grace with Christian Gentiles, but that He has a separate Covenant with Ethnic Jews. John MacArthur believed that a special Jewish Covenant entitled them to land in Palestine. John Hagee believed that the special Jewish Covenant entitles them to salvation. The latter is worse, but both are outrageously heretical. Christians, instead, believe that God fulfills ALL promises exclusively through Christ, not bloodlines (2 Cor 1:20). Dispensationalism holds that the church, aka Christians, are a "parenthesis" in God's redemptive plan. We are a divine distraction until, at such time, God beams us up so He can get back to the main show, which is the Jews, at the center of salvific history. It relegates Gentiles from Bride of Christ to slutty summer fling. It places the church in a subordinate role to unbelievers. That's what you call heresy. No. There are no blessings, promises, or Covenant outside of faith in Jesus Christ - temporal or eternal. Denying that is heresy. And thank God, no one claimed this until Dispensationalism. Berry is right about only one thing. Dispensationalism IS a hermeneutic. And that hermeneutic IS older than the doctrines Dispensationalism invented. In no uncertain terms, Dispensationalism is the Rabbinic hermeneutic, manufactured for Christianity. When Jews read the Bible, all they see are Jews. Jews are the center of it. Jews are what it's about. Jews are the point. That's why when they read Isaiah 53, they walk away thinking that Jews are the suffering servant who justifies sinners before God. Dispensationalism, the Jewish Hermeneutic, places Jews where Jesus belongs in the pages of the Bible. I'd suggest not getting your prophecy interpretation from the people who saw their Messiah in the flesh and instead chose to murder Him. They're bad at prophecy, or they'd be Christians. Dispensationalists, like the Jews, make it all about the restoration of their ethnic nation, getting the land God promised Abraham, and controlling the West Bank trailer park. They're utterly uninterested in things like forgiveness of sins or personal redemption. And in John 11:48, we find out the Jews murdered Jesus because of their belief in Zionism. So, Dispensationalism and Rabbinic Judaism do have an ancient entanglement with Jewish Supremacy. That's why Joel Berry is way more excited about proclaiming Jewish Supremacy than the Kingship of Christ. But bonus points to Berry for alleging that historical correction is "Jew hating." I would expect nothing less from the producer of a Jewish infomercial, who books guests with the affiliations you see in the graphic I also provided below. Joel Berry is bought, and not by Christ. Berry works for Israel. Berry hates Jesus. Berry hates Christians. And he is intentionally trying to manipulate your faith in order to defend the Israeli state. He, almost certainly, is going to hell when He dies, because no legitimate Christian would subvert his own faith for the sake of a geopolitical fetish for a foreign nation. Just remember, folks, "If it is true, it is not new. If it is new, it is not true." And Dispensationalism is really freaking new. Link to the article, "New and Novel: How the Church Responded to the Recent Invention of Dispensational Theology," below. Audio available.

Well, I'm thinking they cried "genocide" because a higher percentage of children have died than in the Holocaust, because civilian non-combatants are 90% of the dead, and more civilian homes have been destroyed than in Hiroshima and Dresden. In a war, the other side actually fights back. This is just Israel shooting kids in a barrel for three years. Meanwhile, as I'm sure you've seen in the news, Netanyahu funded Hamas to the tune of millions of dollars per month, 100% knew the attack was coming, and let it come on purpose specifically to justify this genocide. Then, the IDF stood down until the attack was over and Hamas was leaving, and their Hannibal Protocol murdered hundreds of their own Israeli Citizens. Hope you're well. Praying for you. Hang in there.