We date the book of Revelation some time during the end of the reign of Emperor Domitian (AD 95).
The events in the mid to late 60s of the first century would be absolutely excluded as possible fulfillments. If the book was written after A. 70, then its contents manifestly do not refer to events surrounding the fall of Jerusalem—unless the book is a wholesale fraud, having been composed after the predicted events had already occurred…
However, a number of counterarguments can be raised: First, all four English translations of Eusebius render Irenaeus’ expression clearly and without ambiguity.
For instance, Zane Hodges is a futurist, who holds to the early date of Revelation. Therefore, the dating of Revelation is relatively inconsequential for the futurist, but it is absolutely essential for the preterist interpreter.
If Revelation is dated to AD 95, which has been the traditional dating for the last 1,900 years, then this would render preterist obsolete to Bible believers.
The burden for preterists then is to demonstrate that Revelation was written before A. 70. By contrast, if one is a futurist regarding the book of Revelation, one could hold to either the early date or the late date.Either view would still make Revelation future for the futurist.