Hmm... even within the context, however, this passage (especially adding in 11-13) seem to suggest more that these 7 heads/powers are iterations from past, present, and eventually into future (5 having existed prior to this prophecy, 1 existed at the time of this prophecy, and 1 is to come) with the 1 that is to come having 10 leaders/kings. Regardless, thank you for your input.

I guess my only “push-back”, or perhaps just follow-up, would be how would this fit with the Rev 17:9-10 passage which seems to suggest only 2 heads (or possibly 1) remains? "And here is the mind which hath wisdom. The seven heads are seven mountains, on which the woman sitteth. And there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space."

@DarkMalthorp My post doesn’t categorize pre-trib as a "traditional view" nor is it focused on that, but rather on a subset of it (Imminence). My use of "traditional" in reference to the Doctrine of Imminence isn’t necessarily incorrect, given that 1.) the doctrine wasn’t clearly defined until dispensationalism and pre-tribulational thought developed, and 2.) offshoots of the doctrine exist (as I suggest in my post), meaning there is a "traditional" view of the doctrine that was original and became prominent before variations arose.

I'm inclined to agree - I see this evidently portrayed in the first epistle to the Thessalonians as well. There is no reason, apart from presuppositions, to suggest Paul is referring to a different event in Chapter 4 & 5:. Additionally, 1 Thess 5:4 "But ye, brethren, are not in darkness, that that day should overtake you as a thief" implies that believers will be in the same position (on earth) as non-believers come the Day of the Lord.

But there is in fact something to reconcile regarding the truth of such a doctrine during Peter’s lifetime. Perhaps the early church could have thought of an imminent return and even expected it, but it could not have occurred while Peter was alive. That’s the reconciliation that would need to happen. Perhaps not from the early church perspective, but from the perspective of those who assert Christ’s return has been imminent since his ascension (as my question lays out and MacArthur and others suggest).

For the most part, I'm personally inclined to agree here. However, my question is geared towards those who hold to a view of imminence as MacArthur lays out here("From the very earliest days of the church, the apostles and first-generation Christians nurtured an earnest expectation and fervent hope that Christ might suddenly return at any time to gather His church to heaven"). What defense do they have that such doctrinal view was true for first generation/early church?

Thank you for your response—I've tried to edit the post to make the question more direct regarding whether the Doctrine of Imminence, as held by John MacArthur and others, could have been true during the early portions of Church history given the prophecy of Peter's death.

@SLM It is also strange that those holding this view often simultaneously hold to a view in which Christ’s return has been imminent since he ascended. These being separate church ages would fly in the face of such a view of imminency.

“Not mentioned in the same passage” perhaps true by name (I.e., Day of Lord and Day of Jesus Christ never explicitly stated in the same passage), but 1 Thess 4 which directly ties into chapter 5, with no contextual evidence of a “new day” being mentioned, does directly tie these events into one. Likewise in 2 Thess 1 & 2, as well as Matthew 24 - as I pointed to. Regardless, thank you for the response.