When I was studying my way out of the dispensationalist confusion, I noticed that the dispensationalists are selective literalists, when it fits their preconceived, man-made theology. For example, read the timing of the book of Revelation. The timing given in Rv 1. 1, 3 is as clear as can be. In verse 1 and 3 it refers to the signified or symbolized prophecy which starts at chapter 4.
v1
"things which must shortly come to pass" KJV, RV
"what must soon take place" RSV, NRSV, REB
"events which must shortly come to pass" Weymouth
v3
"for the time is at hand" KJV, RV
"for the time is near" RSV, NRSV
"for the time of fulfilment is near" REB
"for its fulfilment is now close at hand" Weymouth
That is at the beginning of Revelation and then that timing is repeated in the last chapter of Revelation, 22:6, 10. Changing "shortly" or "soon" in v1 into "quickly" or "with speed" does not solve the dispensationalists problem because of v3. Starting in chapter 11, reference is made to the temple without any hint it no longer exists which is hard to understand if the temple had been destroyed 25 years previously. I believe not only was Revelation written prior to 70 AD, but I believe the entire NT was written before 70 AD. I DO LOOK FORWARD TO 'THE LAST DAY' WITH THE RESURRECTION AND JUDGMENT! The last day is yet future.
It is inconsistent literalism to take the 1000 years in Revelation 20 and then try to explain away the clear timing by saying 'a thousand years are as a day to God'. These type contradictions while trying to claim a consistent literalism exposed the many errors of dispensationalism to me. It is Just like trying to insert a gap between the 69th and 70th week of Daniel 9 without any context to justify that; just so it fits into the man-made theology. I was taught that we wait on the millennium for Jesus Christ to be king on the throne of David. Yet, Peter makes it quite clear that David, speaking as a prophet, spoke of the ascension and sitting at the right hand of the Father: Acts 2:29-36, where he now reigns.