Today I discovered Micah John McCormick's dissertation on the active obedience of Christ. It is very similar to the dissertation that I've been planning to do one day at SBTS on the same subject for my ThD. His dissertation can be read here: https://digital.library.sbts.edu/bitstream/handle/10392/3811/3411533.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
His structure is very similar to what I have been planning out. For comparison, here's what I've sketched out for what I'd like to call: "In Defense of Federalism: A Biblical Theology of Imputation":
Establish defeat of serpent as the meritorious act imputed to descendants. Defeat is what gives Adam legal right to eternal life, i.e. tree of life and confirming grace for him and his descendants. Inaugurated eschatology after eating; expansion of garden is a necessary instrumental cause and condition within the covenant parallel to to the good works of believers in expanding Christ's kingdom, but is not meritorious, but instrumental. All descendants inherit the legal right to eternal life through Adam. They do not all have to be separate Adams and gain the right on their own. (maybe write separate paper prior to establish this more).
Noah imputed righteousness
Abraham imputed righteousness (Kline's interpretations)
Comments on Israel as corporate Adam ("Do this and live" as typological of Adamic Covenant); High Priest represents nation (Who Shall Ascend? 131). Romans and Galatians, go there to establish the Law/Gospel contrast and that "works of the law" are meritorious (of life in the land in this case). Jesus' use of Leviticus 18:5
Achan's sin and Adam (Hosea connections?)
Davidic King Imputed righteousness; Psalms 1 + 2; Jim Hamilton Typology Imputed Torah Obedience notes
Christ and the Covenant of Redemption (John 17, Philippians 2, Ephesians 1-2, Titus, 2 Timothy; Romans 5; Isaiah (see my comments in my Romans 5 post; also includes speculation on Hosea connections); Psalms 1 + 2 and others
McCormick's section on Noah is pretty much exactly how I'd handle the subject. I would want to devote minimal space to historical matters and definitions, as my goal is to focus on the exegesis and address exegetical objections against those who are skeptical. I would also want to focus a lot more on the Davidic Covenant, which I believe will provide very fruitful ground for the imputation of Christ's righteousness (as fulfilled within the Covenant of Redemption) and retrospectively provide more evidence for the imputation of Adam's sin. I would also want to stress that when we speak of "imputation" we're talking about the legal ground/right to the blessings and curses of a covenant. In order to vindicate federalism we must stress that we're going beyond proving mere covenantal representation (i.e. Richard Baxter certainly had a covenant theology, but it was not federalist)
