Maybe I did not ask my original question very well. I have a 7th Great Grandfather Anthony Dierdorff who was baptized at the Amwell, NJ church by John Nass. "http://www.amwell.org/About/History/history.html Amwell Church was organized in 1733. In the late fall of that year, when the early German settlers in this area heard that John Naas had landed in Philadelphia in mid-September, a delegation made up of Jacob Moore, Antony Dierdorff, Rudolph Herli and John Peter Lausche waited on Naas and persuaded him to return with them to Amwell as their first pastor" _http://www.amwell.org/About/History/history.html_ (http://www.amwell.org/About/History/history.html) "In Abraham Cassel's "Notices of the Bretheren's Early Churches, with Biographical Sketches of Some of their First Ministers" there is the following chapter: New Jersey - The first appearance of Brethren in New Jersey was 1733, when the following 5 Brethren (who had come in with the last division of 30 families from Holland, with Alexander Mack, in 1729), to wit Reverend Johann Naas, Anthony Deerdorf, Jacob More, Rudolph Harley, and John Peter van Laushe, these five with their families, crossed the Delaware in 1733, and settled at Amwell, in Hunterdon County, about 40 miles NEE from Philadelphia." >From the above you would learn that Anthony Deerdorf came over with Mack and Naas. The question then is why do I find records that state that Naas baptized Anthony at the Amwell church, since the above states that he already was a Brethren? Later at the same web site I find: "A Brief History of the Amwell Church Amwell Church was organized in 1733. In the late fall of that year, when the early German settlers in this area heard that John Naas had landed in Philadelphia in mid-September, a delegation made up of Jacob Moore, Antony Dierdorff, Rudolph Herli and John Peter Lausche waited on Naas and persuaded him to return with them to Amwell as their first pastor. " >From this it can be inferred that the delegation was already living at Amwell when Naas arrived from Holland with Mack. I guess that the delegation may or may not have been Brethren when they asked Naas to return with them to Amwell. This means that either Anthony Dierdorff came over with Peter Becker in 1719. Or at some time in between. Of course a check of all the ship lists from the one that Becker came on in 1719 to the ship that carried Mack in 1729 does NOT show any Dierdorff or variation of the name. So, maybe he was sick in the hold when they made the list for the ship that he came over on. Thanks, Dave Sloan **************Get trade secrets for amazing burgers. Watch "Cooking with Tyler Florence" on AOL Food. (http://food.aol.com/tyler-florence?video=4&?NCID=aolfod00030000000002)