True, but all I did was point out that he was writing to his contemporaries, not directly to us. It seems to me that the interpretation that does the least violence to the text is to take it at face value - they were indeed in the last days before the destruction of Jerusalem. By the way, I am aware that many scholars date those epistles and the Revelation rather late; I happen to disagree with them. There is ample and convincing evidence to place their writing in the 63-66 AD range.
I wonder what kind of historical and spiritual perspective he had
I think his perspective was the same as the tone of the whole New Testament: they were on the verge of something big, something catastrophic, something that would change the world forever. That something was the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple, the permanent end of sacrifices in the Temple, and the permanent end of Temple-based Judaism. In other words, the end of the Old Covenant - the "old Heaven and old Earth" - to make way for the New Covenant - the "New Heaven and New Earth."
For you know quite well that the day of the Lord will come in the same way as a thief in the night. have any meaning for you?
Yes, but I think it had more meaning for those who were there to witness it.
These are my opinions; I respect those of others - I used to be a futurist myself. Hopefully I don't come across as disrespectful or mean; I think robust discussion is a healthy thing.
Yes that may be true about the evidence, but as far as material that the average joe can get a hold of and read that talks about the issue it is like trying to find a needle in a hay stake.