Just so you know; although I am what one might call a 1689 Federalist. I have tremendous respect for Paedo-Baptists such as Pilgrim.
In fact it is on the Highway years ago, that I cut my Calvinist teeth.
It might be because of that, that I have sought hard to understand the covenant positions of Paedo-Baptists (especially the WCF kind) and the CT held in the 1689 LBCF.
It was during that study, that I began to realize that my position before was more in line with Calvinist Baptists who held to Dispensationalism, than it was to the 1689 LBCF.
I then realized how little I really knew and therefore started studying the subject in greater detail. Some of that study came from the Highway's rich resources; on which I thank Pilgrim for all the information he has complied over the years. Of course, some of that information came directly from Pilgrim himself. Can't say that I have always been his best student over the years, right Pilgrim?
I am sure I have given him a few headaches over the years; but I am still here and would be all the poorer if I left.
There are some good book recommendations on Paedo-Baptists CT on this site on which I recommend.
However, I hope Pilgrim does not mind, I would like to recommend a great book coming from a 1689 Federalist perspective.
It is called 'The Distinctiveness of Baptist Covenant Theology' by Pascal Denault http://www.rbap.net/our-books/the-distinctiveness-of-baptist-covenant-theology/
One thing studying both sides has done for me, is made me realize how both sides of the baptism debate often speak right past each other.
Ever seen a Baptist defend a Paedo-Baptist before? I have been known to do this from time to time, when I see a position being misrepresented. When I did, I have made a few Paedo-Baptist friends and made a few of my fellow Baptists mad. Lol
Something else that people might not realize, is that in 1689 Federalism, baptism and the Lords Supper are "means of grace". Believe me, that is something that shocks Dispensational Baptists, lol.