Baptist History Homepage

Regular and Separate Baptists in Kentucky
1742 - 1787
By Frank M. Masters
      From the very beginning of Baptist activities in the territory of Kentucky there appeared two classes of Baptists, the Regular and the Separates, and later a third - the United Baptists.1 These two groups of Baptists did not originate in Kentucky, but emigrated from the older colonies. These two kinds of Baptists were agreed on the fundamental principles, though they came to differ on some minor points. They both held that the Holy Scriptures are the only rule of Faith and Practice; the separation of Church and State; regeneration as a condition of church membership; the individual responsibility to God, and the freedom of worship; congregational form of church government; and the immersion of a believer as the only scriptural form of baptism. The churches that held to these essential principles were regarded as Baptist churches. Such churches rejected infant baptism as both non-scriptural, and contra-scriptural, and also agreed that baptism is symbolical of the great doctrine of redemption and in no wise a condition of salvation.2

      The Philadelphia Association constituted in 1707 was the first and only cooperative Baptist body in America at that time. This Association in 1742 set forth what is known as the Philadelphia Confession of Faith, which was Calvinistic in doctrine, and advocated the "laying on of hands upon baptized believers", and "the singing of Psalms in the worship of God." The scattered churches which composed this association were so well established in sound doctrine, that deviations from accepted teaching churches or individuals, scarcely caused a ripple. "Baptism by unbaptized or unauthorized persons was again and again repudiated" by this, the mother of Baptist associations. Baptist churches and associations, which adhered to the Philadelphia Confessions of Faith from 1742 on, were known as Regular Baptists.3

      The Separate Baptists appeared as a result of the great Spiritual awakening in the New England Colonies in 1740-42 under the ministry of George Whitefield and others. It is well to observe the condition of the Baptists in 1740 outside of the Philadelphia Association, already referred to. [Albert H.] Newman, the Baptist historian says, "Baptist churches were somewhat firmly rooted in Massachusetts, Rhode Island, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware and South Carolina and with feeble churches in Connecticut, New York, Virginia, and North Carolina. While the first Baptist churches in America were strongly Calvinistic, yet Arminian Baptist churches had multiplied in Rhode Island, Massachusetts, and Connecticut."

      The First Baptist Church of Charleston, South Carolina had been almost wrecked by Arminianism. In Virginia, North Carolina and

New York, the Arminian type of teaching prevailed. The First Baptist Church of Boston was considerably shaken by Arminianism about 1740. Calvinism had secured an almost undisputed control in the Philadelphia Association. Arminiansm in the Baptist churches at that time was of the General Baptist type. There were many General Baptist Churches through-out the New England Colonies, while North Carolina was first settled by General Baptists. This was the status of American Baptists at the beginning of the Whitefield revival in the New England Colonies.4

      In 1740 the Congregational Church was the Established Religion of the New England Colonies, except Rhode Island, and conformity to the Established Order was enforced by Civil law. To worship God publicly in any way except according to the ruling of the Established religion was a crime and the violators were punished by fines, imprisonments, whippings, and banishments. The Baptists had suffered these persecutions for over a century. Because of these conditions there was a general lapse in morals and a decay of godliness among professed Christians.

      George Whitefield began his evangelistic labors in the Southern Colonies in 1737 and extended his ministry into the middle and New England Colonies in 1740. This distinguished evangelist was born in England in 1714, and entered the Episcopal ministry. He was associated with John Wesley, and shared with him a deep work of God's grace. Like Wesley, Whitefield was first Arminian in theology, but later became Calvinistic in his preaching. He declared "all men by nature are under sin"; that "the righteousness of Christ alone is the ground of justification of sinners to be received by faith." He placed first emphasis on "the absolute necessity of the new birth, which is solely the work of God's blessed Spirit." Enormous crowds of all classes, sects and denominations, heard his sermons, which often caused "shrieking, crying, weeping and wailing" among his hearers.5

      The Whitefield revval and some of the results were thus described: "By the preaching of Mr. Whitefield through New England a great work of God broke out in that country, distinguished by the name of the New Light Stir. All who joined it were called New Lights. Many preachers of the established order became active in the work. Their success was so great that numbers of the parish clergy, who were opposed to the revival, were apprehensive that they should be deserted by all their hearers. They therefore not only refused them the use of their meeting-houses, but actually procured the passage of a law to confine all preachers to their own parishes. This opposition did not effect the intended object. The hearts of the people, being touched by a heavenly flame, could no longer relish the dry parish service, conducted, for the most part, as they thought, by a set of graceless mercenaries.

      "The New Light Stir being extensive, a great number were converted to the Lord. These, conceiving that the parish congregations, a few excepted, were far from the purity of the Gospel, determined to form a society to themselves. Accordingly, they embodied many churches. Into these none were admitted who did not profess vital religion. Having thus separated themselves from the established churches, they were denominated

Separates. Their church government was entirely upon the plan of the Independents, the power being in the hands of the church. They permitted unlearned men to preach, provided they manifested such gifts as indicated future usefulness. They were Pedobaptists in principle, but did not reject any of their members who chose to submit to believers' baptism.

      "The Separates first took their rise, or rather their name, about the year 1744."6

      While the Separate Societies protested against an unconverted membership, yet they practiced infant baptism. The converts, who united with these Separate Societies, were taught "to throw aside tradition and take the word of God only as their guide in all matters of religious faith and practice. This was in perfect coincidence with all Baptist teaching, and . . . ultimately led thousands, among whom were many ministers, to embrace" the Baptist faith and become Baptists. Little did Whitefield and others think that in the New-Light-Stir, "they were breaking up the fallow ground of their own ecclesiastical system, and sowing seed from which a sect (Baptist), that was everywhere spoken against, would reap a bountiful harvest."7

      Baptists and Pedobaptists were often found in these Separate Societies. Thirty-one ministers were ordained pastors of these various local congregations between 1746 and 1751. Five of these were Baptists before they were ordained, and eight others became Baptists, soon afterwards. Isaac Backus, and Shubal Stearns, ministers among them, were two of the most important Baptist leaders of their generation.8

      Isaac Backus was born in Connecticut in 1724, of Congregational ancestry. He was converted in 1741 during the Great Awakening and joined a Separate Society, which soon out numbered the Congregational Church. In 1747 Backus began to preach, and became pastor of the Separate Church in Middleborough, Connecticut. In 1751 he was baptized by Elder Benjamin Pierce and became a Baptist. Backus at first endeavored to maintain a church with mixed views on baptism, but so many difficulties arose from this practice, that he and a number of his members were fully convinced, "that truth limits church communion to believers, baptized upon a profession of their faith." A Baptist church was organized in the same town of which Backus became pastor. He was a great defender of the Baptist principles throughout New England, and led in contending for religious liberty.9

      Many Baptist churches were formed out of the members of these Separate Societies. In a few cases almost an entire Separate Society would accept believers' baptism and be changed into a Baptist church. The Great Awakening meant much to the Baptists, though they had nothing to do in promoting it; "but as the work was begun and carried on almost wholly by Pedobaptists, from which denomination their fathers had suffered much, most of the Baptists were prejudiced against the work, and against the Calvinian doctrine by which it was promoted."10

      In 1740 the First Baptist Church of Boston and Pastor Jeremy Condy bitterly opposed Whitefield in the great Boston Campaigns, where multitudes

were converted. A number of the "more spiritual members" of the church, who had experienced such a deep work of grace in their hearts, became discontented with Pastor Condy's preaching. They withdrew and formed a separate band, which finally resulted in the constitution of the Second Baptist Church of Boston. On September 29, 1842, they addressed to the pastor and church, a letter setting forth their difficulties. They complained of Mr. Condy as denying "original sin;" explaining away "the corruption and depravity of human nature"; as denying "the doctrine of regeneration," as denying the operation of the Holy Spirit, as distinct from the operation of the human mind; and as "holding to falling from grace." This experience in the Boston Church is an illustration of what took place in many Baptist churches during this great revival period in New England.11

      Shubal Stearns, who was to become such a mighty Baptist influence in the Southern Colonies, was born in Boston, Massachusetts in 1706, and, like Isaac Backus, was one of Congregational ancestry. Stearns was converted under the personal ministry of George Whitefield and joined a Separate Society, and soon became a minister among them. He, like many of the Separates, after examining the Scriptures was convinced of the futility of infant baptism and of the importance of believer's immersion as the Scriptural form of baptism. He came out boldly as a Baptist, and was baptized on a confession of faith in Christ by Rev. Wait Palmer at Toland, Connecticut, in 1751, and was soon after ordained to the Baptist ministry. He labored two or three years in New England, but felt led by the Spirit to carry the gospel "where it was not known, and the great unexplored empire to the west loomed before his imagination. So possessed was he by the evident call of the Holy Spirit, that he talked among his kinsfolk, with the result that a company of sixteen of them started forth upon that historical mission."12

      Stearns and his company departed in the Southwesterly direction and arrived in Virginia on Opeckon Creek, Berkeley County, where there was a Baptist church under the care of Elder John Garrard, who received him kindly. This, known as the Opeckon Baptist Church was constituted in 1743 and united with the Philadelphia Association in 1751, and, therefore, was recognized as a Regular Baptist Church. Here Stearns met with his brother-in-law, Daniel Marshall, who had returned from a mission among the Indians. Marshall, like Stearns, had been converted under the ministry of Whitefield, and was full of spiritual zeal. He was of the Presbyterian faith, but after arriving in Virginia, he and Mrs. Marshall came in contact with the Baptists, and learning of their "faith and order" were baptized, and he was licensed to preach the gospel.13

      Newman says, "These Separate Baptists from New England brought with them the eccentricities of manner that characterized the New Light movement. It is doubtful whether any evangelist but Whitefield surpassed Stearns in magnetic power over audiences. His tones were peculiarly impressive and capitvating, and his eyes seem to have had almost magical power over those upon whom they were fixed. Trembling, weeping, screaming and catalepsy were common effects of his highly impressive exhortations."14

      Stearns and Marshall labored for a short time as evangelists in Berkeley and Hampshire Counties, Va. (now W. Va.). Here they met considerable criticism and opposition, because of their animated preaching. Some of the more cold hearted of the Philadelphia Baptist Association. A Mr. Miller was sent to see what was the trouble. When he came, he was highly delighted with such warm hearted Christians, and said he would not take gold for them. Miller charged those who complained, should rather encourage such a good work. Soon the work of God was revived among those that complained.15

      Stearns and his company soon left Virginia and moved into Guilford County, North Carolina and settled on Sandy Creek. Here they erected a little meeting house, and on November 22, 1755, constituted themselves into a church with sixteen members, known as Sandy Creek Church. Shubal Stearns was chosen pastor with Daniel Marshall to assist him.

      Semple thus describes the situation: "The natives round about this little colony of Baptists, altho' brought up in the Christian religion, were grossly ignorant of its essential principles. . . .

      "The doctrine of Mr. Stearns and his party was consequently quite strange. To be born again, appeared to them as absurd as it did to the Jewish doctor, when he asked, if he must enter the second time into his mother's womb and be born again. Having always supposed that religion consisted in nothing more than the practice of its outward duties, they not comprehend how it should be necessary to feel conviction and conversion: But to be able to ascertain the time and place of one's conversion was, in their estimation, wonderful indeed - These points were all strenuously contended for by the new preachers. But their manner of preaching was, if possible, much more novel than their doctrines. . . . The people were greatly astonished having never seen things in this wise before. Many mocked, but the power of God attending them, many also trembled. In process of time some of the natives became converts, and bowed obedience to the Redeemer's sceptre. These, uniting their labours with the chosen band, a powerful and extensive work broke out. - From 16, Sandy Creek Church soon swelled to 606 members; so mightily grew the work of God!"16 This was the first Separate Baptist church south of New England.

      Daniel Marshall soon gathered a church at Abbot's Creek about thirty miles distant, and was called to become pastor. He arranged to to move into the midst of the church, but a great difficulty was experienced in finding a minister to cooperate with Stearns, in ordaining him. They were informed that there were some Regular Baptist preachers on the Pedee River. "To one of these Mr. Stearns applied, and requested him to assist him in the ordination of Mr. Marshall. - This request he sternly refused, declaring that he held no fellowship with Stearns's party; that he believed them to be a disorderly set; suffering women to pray in public, and permitting every ignorant man to preach that chose: that they encouraged noise and confusion in their meetings. Application was then made to Mr. Henry Ledbetter, who lived somewhere in the southern states, and who was a brother-in-law of Mr. Marshall. He and Mr. Stearns ordained Mr. Marshall to the care of this new church."17

      In 1760 a church was organized at Little River, North Carolina, with five members, which increased to over five hundred in three years. In 1758 Marshall extended his labors into Virginia. Among his converts was Dutton Lane, who became a mighty power. Forty-two persons were converted in Lane's first revival effort, who were baptized by Daniel Marshall, and constituted into the first Separate Baptist Church in Virginia. Soon after Lane was saved, the power of God was effectual in the salvation of Samuel Harris, "a man of great distinction," who wrought mightily in Virginia in multiplying Baptists. James Read was raised up in North Carolina, who later, also became a great flaming evangel in Virginia.18

      Newman, using the language of Morgan Edwards, states that by 1775 the Sandy Creek church "had spread her branches southward as far as Georgia; eastward, to the sea and Chesapeake Bay; and northward, to the waters of the Potomac. It, in seventeen years, became mother, grandmother, and great-grandmother, to 42 churches, from which sprung 125 ministers, many of whom are ordained, and support the sacred character as well as any set of clergy in America."19

      The coming of the Separate Baptists to North Carolina, under the leadership of Shubal Stearns marked a new day for Baptists in the Southern States. Paschal says: "Had the Baptists in North Carolina, Virginia, South Carolina and Georgia continued after 1755 to develop along the line of the Philadelphia Confession of 1742 and the like Charleston Confession, it is safe to say that the Baptists of the South would not have been the great and numerous denomination they are today (1930). While in so far as they had an educated ministry they would have gained adherents and had a respectable and influential membership, their rigid Calvinism would have kept them from prosecuting missionary labors with success. . . . It must be regarded as the special blessing of our Heavenly Father that in 1755 He sent the Separate Baptists to our Providence."20

      It is well to note that "in the year 1760, from the most authentic accounts Baptists of every order in Virginia amounted to 5 churches, 5 ordained ministers, 2 licensed preachers, and about 500 members. Newman says that in Virginia "The progress of the Separate Baptist movement from 1760 to 1770 was almost unexampled in Baptist History. Under such evangels as Samuel Harris and John Waller, whole communities were stirred to their depth and strong Baptist churches were established, where the Baptist name had scarcely been heard of a short time before." A writer, not a Baptist says: "The Separate Baptists tore the South from the Episcopalians at the very moment when the Colonies were being torn from the crown."21

      In 1760 the Separate Baptist churches of North Carolina and Virginia formed the Sandy Creek Association, and for the next ten years, the progress of the Separate Baptists in these two states was without parallel. In 1770 the General Association of Separate Baptists was constituted in Virginia and continued until 1783, when this body was succeeded by the General

Committee. The General Association held two meetings during the year for the convenience of the large constituency. The General Committee of Separate Baptists was created to be composed of at least four messengers from each association to meet annually to consider matters that may be for the good of the whole Society." The territory of the Committee of Separate Baptists was divided into four districts on each side of the James River. There was also an agreement in the General Committee that a Confession of Faith be adopted to afford a standard of principles for the future. The Philadelphia Confession of Faith was agreed to with some definite restrictions. The Separate Baptists of Virginia were represented in the General Committee in the consideration of all Baptist affairs.22

      Before the year 1770, the Regular Baptists were spread over the Northern neck of Virginia above Fredericksburg. The Ketockton Association constituted in 1766 was the representative body of the Regular Baptists, who took the Philadelphia Confession of Faith as their sole standard. In 1770 the association was composed of ten churches with six hundred and twenty-four members. For twenty years the churches of this body practiced the laying on of hands, immediately after a candidate was baptized. The Ketockton Association became so extensive in territory that other similar bodies were formed from it.23

      This was the general situation among the Baptists of Virginia and North Carolina, when they began to settle in Kentucky from these two states. It was unfortunate, however, that there had been a marked spiritual decline, as a result of the long war of Independence which absorbed the attention of the colonies. Thus the Separate Baptists as well as the Regulars had lost much of their evangelistic zeal before emigrating to Kentucky.

      One significant fact, was that of the first twenty-five preachers, who settled in Kentucky, twenty of them were known to have been Separate Baptists in Virginia and North Carolina; of the remaining five only one was a Regular Baptist; yet after settling in Kentucky, eighteen out of the twenty-five subscribed to the Philadelphia Confession of Faith and identified themselves as Regular Baptists, while seven remained Separates. It is also a fact that at the close of 1785, of the eighteen churches, which had been constituted, eleven were Regular Baptists and seven Separate Baptists. Most of the churches on the South side of the Kentucky River, constituted prior to 1786, were Separates, while most of those on the North side of the same stream were Regulars.

      When these two classes of Baptists first came to Kentucky there was practically no friction among them, as both agreed on the essential doctrines. The division between them was first manifest when the first associations were formed in the State. There were factions in each group, who began to magnify the minor points of difference, and at the same time to minimize the points of agreement. Often times, as we shall see, two Baptist churches would be located in the same community, and by the same name, one a Separate, and the other a Regular.

      It is important to give some attention to the union of these divisions of Baptists. The first union was formed in North Carolina in May, 1786,

under the head of United Baptists; when it was agreed that the name of "Regular" and "Separate" Baptists he "hurled in oblivion." The Separates were very strict in that State in demanding an experience of salvation before baptism, hence the following points of agreement were adopted:

      1. "We think that none but believers in Christ have a right to the ordinance of baptism; therefore, we will not hold communion of those who plead for the validity of baptism in unbelief.

      2. "We leave every church member to decide for himself, whether he has been baptized in unbelief or not.

      3. "We leave every minister at liberty to baptize, or not, such persons as desire to be baptized, being scrupulous about their former baptism."

      Salvation before baptism had been a contention of the Separate Baptists from their beginning. They contended that regeneration before baptism was lost in the early part of the seventeenth century, when their work began and restored it.24

      The union of these two groups of Baptists was consumatied in Virginia in 1787 under the head of the "United Baptists." The leaders of both the Regular and Separate Baptists of the State felt that the difference between the two connections was too slight to make a bar to fellowship. The Ketockton Association, representing the Regulars sent delegates to the General Committee of the Separates, at their meeting in 1786, who were cordially received, on an equal footing with the rest. The General Committee requested the different associations of the Separate Baptists to send delegates to attend their next meeting for the purpose of forming a Union with the Regular Baptists. The several efforts for union in the past were now being brought to a happy conclusion.

      Many of the hinderances on both sides had been removed. The Regulars had become more evangelistic, while the Separates had somewhat modified their extreme enthusiasm in their revival work, which had been so offensive to the Regulars. Also the Separates had accepted the Philadelphia Confession of Faith, though with restrictions. The Separates declared on their part "that the doctrine of salvation by Christ and free unmerited grace alone, ought to be believed by every Christian, and maintained by every minister of the gospel." Then it was asserted, that "Upon these terms we are united; and desire hereafter that the names Regular and Separate be buried in oblivion, and that, from henceforth, we shall be known by the name of the United Baptist Churches of Christ in Virginia." This proved a happy, permanent union of the Baptists of Virginia. A communication of this action was forwarded at once to Kentucky urging a similar union of the Separate and Regular Baptists in that state, but all efforts failed until 1801, fifteen years later, which will be considered at that time.25

      It is in order to consider some of the peculiar customs and practices of both the Regular and Separate Baptists in Virginia and other states, which were brought to Kentucky by the pioneer preachers and introduced into the early churches. Only three of these practices will be mentioned in this connection - Ruling Elders, Laying on of Hands, and Washing the Saints' Feet.

      First, THE OFFICE OF RULING ELDERS was retained in some of the churches. This custom was probably introduced into the Baptist churches of Virginia by the zealous Separate Baptists, who may have received the practice from the Puritans in New England; it was brought to Kentucky. The churches and associations never defined the office, nor clearly understood its function. The Elfchorn Association in 1790 gives out the opinion "that the ruling Elder is a gospel institution." The Tate's Creek Association rendered the decision that "one ordained preacher and two elders" would have the authority to constitute a new church. The question continued to be raised in many of the Baptist meetings as to the proper function of this office, but no clear definition was ever given. After a few years the office ceased to exist in the churches.

      LAYING ON OF HANDS AFTER BAPTISM was another peculiar practice among the early churches. This ceremony seems to have been a common custom of some of the Baptist Churches in England and in America in the 17th Century. The First Baptist Church of Providence, Rhode Island in 1652 made the laying on of hands a condition of coming to the Lord's Supper. When the Philadelphia Confession of Faith was adopted in 1742 from the London Confession of 1689, Article 31 concerning tihe Laying on of Hands was added, which read as follows: "We believe that 'laying on of hands' with prayer upon baptized believers, as such, is an ordinance of Christ and ought to be submitted unto by all such persons, that are admitted to partake of the Lord's Supper." The first churches of Virginia were members of the Philadelphia Association and when the first Association was formed in 1766 out of these and other churches, that body had the approval of the mother of associations. Many of the churches in Virginia practiced this ceremony.

      John Taylor describes the ceremony in a statement in regard to the first baptizing in South River:" . . . the noted Samuel Harris travelled two hundred miles to administer this solemn ordinance - and an awfully solemn thing it was indeed to thousands, who had never witnessed such a scene before. I think fifty-three were baptized on that day, several young ministers came with Harris, as Elijah Craig, John Waller, with a number of others. The rite of laying on of hands, on the newly baptized, was practiced by the Baptists in those days: this practice was performed as follows: those upwards of fifty, stood up in one solemn line, on the bank of the river, taking up about as many yards as there were individuals - the males first in the line, about four ministers went together, each one laid his right hand on the head of the dedicated person, and one prayed for him, and after praying for three or four of them, another proceeded till they went through. It would appear as if that solemn dedication might be some barrier to future apostasy; for the prayers were with great solemnity and fervor, and for that particular person according to their age and circumstances."26 When this ceremony was completed, the the baptized converts were then regarded to be in fellowship with the church.

      The custom was brought from Virginia and introduced into the early churches of Kentucky, by some of the preachers from that State. The Elkhorn Association declared the churches were at liberty to practice or not

practice the laying on of hands after baptism. In the session of May, 1788 corresponding messengers from the Salem Association refused to take seats in the Elkhorn body until explanation was made for tolerating such looseness in regard to laying hand's on persons newly baptized. After a full explanation, the Salem messengers took seats in the body. The custom soon fell into disuse in the Kentucky churches and has never been revived.

      THE WASHING OF THE SAINTS' FEET was also a practice among the early churches and associations. The subject of "feet washing" was discussed in the Elkhorn Association in 1787, and, the year following, it was agreed that "the Association has no right to interfere with the internal affairs of an orderly church". The South Kentucky Association of Separate Baptists in the session of 1788 declared the "washing of the Saints' feet is a duty enjoined on Christians." The few Regular Baptist Churches, which practiced the rite, soon discontinued its observance. The Separate Baptist churches, which failed to go into the union with the Regulars and Separates in 1801 continued to practice the custom. They claim, "That Baptism, the Lord's Supper and washing of the Saints' feet are ordinances of the gospel to be kept until the coming of our Lord and Master."27


1. Spencer, John H., A History of Kentucky Baptists, Vol. 1, p. 102-111.
2. Sweet, William Warren, Religion on the American Frontier, the Baptists, 1783-1830, p. 43, 44.
3. Newman, A. H., A History of the Baptist Churches in the United States, p. 275.
4. Ibid., p. 239.
5. Ibid., p. 242-244.
6. Semple, Robert B., A History of the Rise and Progress of the Baptists in Virginia, Revised Edition, p. 11, 12.
7. Benedict, David, A General History of the Baptist Denomination, 1848 Edition, p. 392.
8. Newman, A. H., op. cit., p. 245.
9. Sweet, William Warren, op. cit., p. 5, 6; Newman, A. H., op. cit., p. 247, 251.
10. Backus, Isaac, A History of New England with particular Reference to the Denomination of Christians called Baptists, 1871 Edition, Vol. 2, p. 41.
11. Benedict, David, op. cit., 1848 Edition, p. 393.
12. Jackson, E. B., "Shubal Stearns - Spirit-led Leader," The Western Recorder, April 10, 1947, p. 4.
13. Sweet, William Warren, op. cit., p. 8.
14. Newman, A. H., op. cit., p. 293.
15. Semple, Robert B., op. cit., 1810 Edition, p. 289.
16. Ibid., p. 3-5.
17. Ibid. p. 5; Benedict, David, op. cit., 1813 Edition, Vol. 2, p. 39, 40.
18. Benedict, David, op cit., 1813 Edition, Vol. 2, p. 40-42.
19. Newman, A. H., op. cit, p. 294.
20. Paschal, George W., History of North Carolina Baptists, Vol. 1, p. 270, 271.
21. Little, Lewis Peyton, Imprisoned Preachers and Religious Liberty in Virginia, p. 35; Newman, A. H., op. cit., p. 296; Mead, Frank S., See These Banners Go, p. 115. 22. Newman, A. H., op. cit., p. 300, 301; Semple, Robert B., op. cit., Revised Edition, p. 91, 92.
23. Semple, Robert B., op. cit., 1810 Edition, p. 288.
24. Paschal, George W., op. cit., p. 492, 493.
25. Newman, A. H., op. cit., p. 301, 302.
26. Taylor, John, A History of Ten Baptist Churches, Second Edition, p. 9, 10.
27. Spencer, John H., op. cit., Vol. 1, p. 486.


[From Frank M. Masters, A History of Baptists in Kentucky, 1953, pp. 41-50. Scanned and formatted by Jim Duvall.]

More Kentucky Baptist Histories
Baptist History Homepage