For most people, for much of the history of the church, this background literature [Enochic] - which would have shed light on the original understanding of the binding of Satan in Rev 20:1-3- was unavailable. Just as adjustments to biblical interpretation and theology occurred in the Reformation with the recovery of ancient biblical texts and writings of early church fathers, perhaps some age-old assumptions about the original meaning of Rev 20:1-3 should have been revisited in light of the restoration of these important texts. Alas, Protestant Reformers mostly adopted and adapted the old Augustinian amillennial reading of the text, doubling down on the partial, limited binding of Satan in the present church age This failure of recovery and reassessment led to the perpetuation of weak exegesis of the passage, which in turn codified an anti-premillennial eschatology for centuries. But if we read the passage in light of its original historical-theological-literary context, a blurry picture that can be manipulated in a number of ways becomes more focused and defined. -Annette Yoshiko Reed