Revelation wasn’t a warning about
our future. It was about theirs.

When people hear you say the Book of Revelation was about the fall of Jerusalem in AD 70, they look at you like you just invented a new religion. But here’s the thing—they’re not just wrong. They’re ignoring what some of the early church actually believed.

Below are early Christian witnesses—before the 10th century—who either explicitly or implicitly affirmed that Revelation was about the judgment on Jerusalem. They weren’t guessing. They were closer to the events and the context. Let’s walk through the receipts.

Victorinus of Pettau (c. 300 AD) – Jerusalem as the "Great City"

Victorinus wrote the first Latin commentary on Revelation. When he hit Revelation 11:8—the city "where the Lord was crucified"—he didn’t try to spin it into something symbolic. He said it flat out:

"He calls Jerusalem Sodom and Egypt, since it had become the heaping up of the persecuting people."

Victorinus identified the "great city" as Jerusalem, the one guilty of killing Christ. That means he saw part of Revelation as pointing to God’s judgment on Jerusalem for that crime. That’s not futurism. That’s preterism, right there in the early 300s.

Epiphanius of Salamis (c. 375 AD) – John Wrote Revelation Before 70 AD

This bishop didn’t just talk theology—he dropped a timeline bomb. In Panarion, he claimed:

"John prophesied before his falling asleep, during the time of Claudius Caesar, when he was on the isle of Patmos."

Claudius reigned from AD 41 to 54. If Epiphanius is right, then John’s visions came before the Jewish-Roman war ever began. That means Revelation wasn’t written after the destruction of Jerusalem—it predicted it. Let that sink in.

Apringius of Beja (c. 540 AD) – John Exiled Under Claudius

Apringius doubled down on the early date in his commentary:

"At the time of Claudius Caesar... [John] was transported into exile... to the island of Patmos, and while there he confirmed this writing."

Like Epiphanius, Apringius places Revelation during Claudius’s reign—not Domitian’s. That puts it squarely in the pre-70 AD window, opening the door wide for a preterist interpretation.

Andreas of Caesarea (c. 610 AD) – Sixth Seal = Jerusalem’s Fall?

Andreas was a bishop who compiled earlier views in his Greek commentary on Revelation. He didn’t make this stuff up—he preserved it. On Revelation 6 (the sixth seal), he wrote:

"There are not wanting those who apply this passage to the siege and destruction of Jerusalem by Titus."

Boom. Early Christians—before Andreas—were already saying Revelation 6 wasn’t about some distant apocalypse. It was about Titus crushing Jerusalem in AD 70.

Arethas of Caesarea (c. 900 AD) – Calls It Like It Is

Arethas took Andreas’s commentary and went further. On Revelation 7, he says:

"Here, then, were manifestly shown to the Evangelist what things were to befall the Jews in their war against the Romans, in the way of avenging the sufferings inflicted upon Christ."

He’s not dancing around it. He straight up says Revelation predicted the Jewish War and that it was God’s vengeance for killing Jesus. If that’s not a preterist interpretation, what is?

And he adds this kicker:

"The destruction at the hands of the Romans had not yet taken place."

That means he believed Revelation was written before AD 70. And that’s your framework for interpreting the whole book.

Bonus Witnesses

Most modern teachers claim John wrote Revelation under Domitian around AD 95. But early church voices told a different story:

• Epiphanius

4th century – said John received the vision under Claudius (reigned AD 41–54).

• Syriac Version

Says John was exiled under Nero (reigned AD 54–68).

Two different emperors—but both before the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. That means Revelation wasn’t written after the fact… it was a warning of what was coming.

• Muratorian Fragment (late 100s AD)

Says John wrote Revelation before Paul finished writing his letters. That only works if Revelation was written early.

So What?

If all you’ve heard is that Revelation is about our future, you’ve been robbed. These early voices show a consistent thread of believers who saw it for what it was: a warning of imminent judgment on the Old Covenant world.

They didn’t need charts, timelines, or beast-tracking tech. They just looked at history and Scripture side by side—and it lined up.

Now that you know, what are you gonna do with it?

🟣 Ready to go deeper? Read the blog post on why Jesus said “this generation” and meant it.