The whole underpinning of dispensationalism are the bolded parts. If you prove them wrong, I guess the whole silly thing falls apart.
So, you want a LITERAL interpretation of the Bible, which includes a rapture!
"Then we who are alive, who are left, will be suddenly caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And so we will always be with the Lord." 1 Thess. 4:17 NET
Note that the ones who are LEFT, will be the ones who greet the Lord, not the ones who are "gone" or "raptured."
I have searched high and low, and the word "rapture" is not in any Bible translation I have read, nor Greek or Hebrew. In fact, it was one of Jerome's many mistakes in the Latin Vulgate, when he transliterated 1 Thess. 4:17 from Greek to Latin. Notice, not translate, but transliterate. That means taking a word in another language, which he didn't know, and putting it in the translation by sounds.
So, here is the Greek:
"ἔπειτα ἡμεῖς οἱ ζῶντες οἱ περιλειπόμενοι ἅμα σὺν αὐτοῖς ἁρπαγησόμεθα ἐν νεφέλαις εἰς ἀπάντησιν τοῦ κυρίου εἰς ἀέρα· καὶ οὕτως πάντοτε σὺν κυρίῳ ἐσόμεθα." 1 Thess. 4:17
And here is the Latin:
"deinde nos qui vivimus qui relinquimur simul rapiemur cum illis in nubibus obviam Domino in aera et sic semper cum Domino erimus" 1 Thess. 4:17
Now, I am not 100% sure, but I think that rapiemur, might be the transliteration for ἁρπαγησόμεθα! And I have no intention of ever learning Latin, and yet, that is what Erasmus used for his translation, and hence the KJV comes from this. Since, they basically used Erasmus' translation.
ἁρπαγησόμεθα is a future indicative passive verb in Greek! NOT a noun, as "the rapture" would have to be! In fact, ἀρπαγμος would be the noun, and it only appears in Phil. 2:6, where it is difficult to translate. But probably something to do with grasped to his own advantage. So, the Bible does not use the noun, which some want to translate as "The Rapture." In fact, the word does not appear at all in the Septuagint, and the occurrence in Phil 2:6 is not connected to end times at all, but rather is about Jesus and his first coming. I did not find one version that was able to translate this satisfactorily. Here is the NET!
"who though he existed in the form of God
did not regard equality with God
as something to be grasped," Phil. 2:6 NET
"Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:" Phil. 2:6 KJV
Certainly, BDAG is correct when it says the KJV cannot be right! Because, "the state of being equal with God cannot be equated with the act of robbery." (pg 133)
ἀρπάζω or harpazo is the verb, which appears in 1 Thess. 4:17. It means grasp or seize, in the sense that no resistance is offered.
But, for arguments sake, even if harpzo really said "rapture" which it doesn't, you can NEVER make a doctrine out of one verse! Hermeneutically, that is unsound.
So, no, dispensationalism does not take the Bible literally. In fact, it adds a bunch of things that are NOT in the Bible at all! And that means the rapture!
So, not literal because the word "rapture" upon which the entire eschatology of dispensationalism is based, is not in the Bible, so, it is NOT literal.
PS. I am a partial preterist!