Bung,
That's nonsense. The 1914 date came from a couple of Anglicans who speculated on prophecy. E. B. Elliot and Christopher Bowen formulated a date system from which Barbour borrowed. Period. The 2520 year count's first known publication was from an American Calvinist preacher. Repeating discredited claims does we "apostates" no good and much harm.
Russell's doctrine wasn't Second Adventist. It was Age-to-Come, specifically One Faith, a small group of about 4000 gathered around the newspaper The Restitution. They are by outsiders sometimes characterized as Age-to-Come adventists, but in point of fact were antagonistic to Adventists. There was mutual ill will.
By the time Russell met him, Storrs had been long separated from Millerite Adventism, and was, in fact, shunned by many Millerite Adventists. This is not all that hard to discover. Stetson had once been associated with Advent Christians. By 1870 he was writing for the Resititution and the British journal Rainbow. Neither of these journals, nor Stetson was then teaching Adventist doctrine.
Somewhere on this forum is a rather stupid post saying that Russell called Miller "father miller." That's false. The article in question was by John Corbin Sunderlin, an associate of Russell's. Neither men endorsed Miller's doctrine. Russell tells what his relationship to Miller and his doctrine is in Studies in the Scriptures. Parroting wrong statements because they appeal to you is rather stupid. Almost no one on this forum checks on the validity of what they write about Russell.
Was he a fruitcake? Sometimes. Is most of what's said on this forum accurate? Almost never. Do some original research. Read the original source material. Skip wikipedia which is largely wrong. Almost all of the original source material is available online or with moderate difficulty elsewhere.
If we want to make valid points, we should be accurate. The book on N. Barbour I mentioned in a previous content is a good starting point. The authors plan to release volume one of their next book early next year. I've read most of it in rough draft. Buy it when it comes out. It shines lights in places no one has looked before, and does it from original source material, including letters and papers I did not know existed. But by all means check your statements before you make them, because most of what you've read here and elsewhere is just wrong.
Read this blog on a regular basis. You will benefit: http://truthhistory.blogspot.com/