Curious on feedback for the below article. I am relatively new to the Reformed Faith and to Covenant Theology (CT). The below article advocates the 1689 Federalism View of CT. Their argument seems to be decent, but it defines the COG as only including the New Covenant. https://pilgrimandshire.wordpress.com/2014/09/12/covenant-theology-presbyterian-or-baptist/ 1. For my Westminster brothers...what are your thoughts? What is a simple yet solid argument that the COG consist of all of the Post Fall covenants? I must admit when I fist began to study CT as outlined in the Westminster Standards...my biggest hurtle (as a former Baptist) was the language of Old Covenant and New Covenant in the book of Hebrews. I know that in the context of the book of Hebrews "Old Covenant" referred to the Mosaic and not the whole OT. So the word "New" has been tougher to wrestle with. I do hold to CT as outlined in the Westminster Standards, but I am still trying to further solidify my mind on the matter. Any help my Presbyterian brothers can provide on this matter would be much appreciated. 2. CT Baptist Brothers...is this (the linked article) an accurate representation of your view of CT? 3. Hit up the Poll P.S. I do NOT hold the view that the Mosaic Covenant was a republication of the COW, so if you hold that view, please make that clear if your post.