something I’d be interested to know is, are the likes of Keller, Piper, Driscoll and D.A Carson (Gagging of God argues for a position similar to Keller’s on hell) aware of the narrative arguments, or just so committed to Reformed doctrines they’d rather not know?
That’s a very good question. There has been scholarly engagement between the reactionary forces of the Reformed and the reforming forces of the New Perspective (eg., Piper’s debate with N.T. Wright over justification, and I’ve no doubt Carson has had something to say on the matter). But it seems to me that by and large the Reformed argument is based squarely on traditional assumptions and demonstrates little interest in critical exegetical methods.