The preterist approach to Revelation is most clearly contrasted with the futurist approach.
According to the preterist approach, most of the prophecies in the book of Revelation were fulfilled not long after John wrote.v
In other words, their fulfillment is past from the perspective of the twenty-first century.vi The fourth major approach to the book is the idealist or symbolic approach.
According to this view, Revelation does not contain prophecies of specific historical events. Instead, it uses symbols to express timeless principles concerning the conflict between good and evil.
Until recently these various approaches have been considered by most to be mutually exclusive. A number of scholars, however, have begun to propose a fifth approach, which may be termed the eclectic approach. As one proponent of this view explains, “The solution is to allow the preterist, idealist, and futurist methods to interact in such a way that the strengths are maximized and the weaknesses minimized.”vii One of the first to espouse such an approach was George Ladd.
He concluded that the correct method of interpreting the book of Revelation was to blend the futurist and preterist methods.viii He has been followed in this basic eclectic approach, although with different emphases, by a number of scholars including Gregory Beale, Grant Osborne, and Vern Poythress.ix
Because the approach one takes to the book of Revelation dramatically affects one’s exegetical conclusions, it is necessary that I explain the reasons I take the approach I do. I believe that the book itself demands a basically preterist approach.
This does not mean that all of the prophecies in the book have already been fulfilled. Some of the prophecies in Revelation (e.g., 20:7–22:21) have yet to be fulfilled, but many, if not most, of the prophecies in the book have been fulfilled.
My approach then may be considered as essentially preterist.x
continued
https://www.ligonier.org/blog/preterist-approach-revelation-unfolding-biblical-eschatology/
