FYI Old Goat...and the name may well apply, my comment was in reference to Smiddy's mention of both Barbour and Miller...if you reread my post, which might be difficult unless you have your glasses, you will notice that it does not address the question of the poster, it simply states, sarcastically I might add, that Barbour and Miller were biblical powerhouses!
As for my curriculum vitae in all things Russel, let's see, where should I start? Unlike many Witnesses, I was all in...emphasis on "all." I had in my possession at one time, the entire set of Studies in the Scriptures which I had read. Mind you, not good reading cause I like pictures. From The Divine Plan of the Ages to Atonement. No, I do not include the Finished Mystery because, as you know, it was Rutherford who penned that fiasco. Unless, of course, you subscribe to the belief that Franz wrote it (I do by the way, having dissected his writing style over the course of decades of research).
As well, having had access to a library that could only be comaprable to the Gilead library or that kept under lock and key at 24 Columbia hts, I would say that I have read most of the foundational writings of Russel in Zion's, as well as portions of his Food for Thinking Christians, Tabernacle and its Teachings, and several other monumental literary works.
Now, as for your assertion that Russel was not influenced by Miller, based apparently on the position of Schulz and de Vienne, I would suggest that a simple cursory examination of the religious fervor at the time would counter that position. It is difficult to assume, as apparently Schulz and de Vienne do based on your comment, that the effect of William Miler and his "movement" would not impact the impressionable mind of Russel as he started on his path to religious enlightenment. His affiliation with George Storrs by 1876 and his later affiliation with Barbour by 1877, would indicate, at least to this perspicacious student, that he knew of and most likely had examined the writings of Miller. As for being influenced by them, well, let's just say, Miller expected the end by 1843, Russel by 1914. He did not obviously agree with Miller's calculations but subscribed wholeheartedly to the belief that the epoch of time in which he was living was the "time" of God's greatest intervention. I think it goes without saying that THAT is exactly what Miller believed. Somewhat of a kindred spirit don't you think?
Well, I guess that just about sums it up. And yes, I would bet.
