I have always maintained that I can be convinced to change my mind based on scripture.
There are several issues that I have been convinced from scripture to change my views.
I do know know that John MacArthur (whom I admire) has dispensationalism views.
I simply cannot understand how he got there?
Peace to you
I know very little of the gentleman and can't say whether he does or doesn't.
I can say that if he did get there it was by reading Revelation the same way he read the Gospels and Acts, in a literal format.
Until he came to the parables of Christ. He said for example, "you are the salt of the earth." It's obvious this can't be taken literally and neither was it meant to be taken literal. Christ used the word "salt" to convey a truth He wanted to present.
It's the same effect in Revelation with all it's symbols representing a truth. The symbols must be determined in order to find the truth, but the Scripture must be read literally in line with the truth revealed in the symbols.
For example, the 7 Golden Candlesticks in Rev. 1:20 are the symbol of the 7 Churches of Asia and the Church in general. That is the truth the Holy Spirit is revealing with the symbols. If we are reading the context literally the symbol will complete the literal truth.
There is no need, and it will throw everything off track if we don't follow a literal reading just as the rest of the Scripture and determine the symbols as we go.
Revelation is broken down into 3 parts, "the things you have seen, the things which are, and the things which shall be hereafter." This sets in motion the literal point A to B in a succession of consecutive events from the beginning to the end. It begins with the events of John's day and ends with the New Heavens and the New earth.
This is the only way of reading that will bring all the pieces together.