Dating the book revalation
Barring any evidence to the contrary or attacks on the credibility of Eusebius, this information presents a real problem for those who hold to the early date (abt. He acknowledges “the strongest arguments for the late date” are made concerning Ireanaeus’ testimony.
The only logical conclusion is that John wrote the book of Revelation after 96 A. He states, “If the late date is accepted, it would be impractical and meaningless to interpret the book in the light of the fall of Israel.” Therefore, I would expect Brother Ogden to make a most convincing argument to contradict the quotes given by Eusebius.
However, after reading many different sources on the subject, I have not found anyone who has addressed Hegesippus’ testimony as it relates to the dating of the book of Revelation. Logically speaking, if the early date is correct and Hegesippus’ testimony is also correct then John was in exile for some thirty years. then we would know for sure that the early date is inaccurate.
However, he gives a weak defense by implying through another commentator who uses Robert Young’s statement (late 1800), that Ireaneus really meant Nero. Sproul's work, "The Last Days According to Jesus", I sought out BJF and read it with an open mind that had already dumped any pre-tribulation view after the Y2K "mess" and had starting thinking more about the nature of the Olivet Discourse. Digging through the pages of history of the early church fathers, citing excellent commentaries from the late 19th and early 20th century, and taking Scripture with the seriousness that any scholar should, Gentry gives overwhelming evidence that Revelation was written prior to A. 70 and also gives us answers into some of the mysteries such as Who is the Beast? If you are into any view that calls for a tribulation of any kind, should you decide to read this book, you will definitely be affected and challenge to make a change of such a view. Gentry not only presents and defends his side with hard exegetical evidence, but also takes the time to present other views and then explains, using this same method, why they are not true. as well as demonstrating that the majority of Revelation, all of the Olivet Discourse and the 70 weeks passage in Daniel was fulfilled in the destruction of the Temple by the Romans. Gentry shows that, as should always be the case, that prophecy is easier to understand after it has been fulfilled than before.Preterists tend to assume that Preterism and Replacement Theology are mutually inclusive.Revelation is not about the end of THE age but the end of AN age, the Age of Judaism.