I’m going to use it.

I don’t want to continue any combativeness but it seems like you may have only pulled the quotes that support his acceptance. I believe you could have used just as many, if not more quotes to make the opposing argument and then weighed them thoughtfully. I was surprised by your conclusion. Even some of the quotes you used from the podcast were talked about in the context of a rejection of those things communicated. Just my 2 cents.

Let’s not dirty this conversation by falling into accusations & name calling.
Arguing it’s wrong to call Driscoll a bully is fine, but accusing someone of being ridiculous for doing so is not.
Based on what he has researched about Driscoll, Mark stated that Driscoll was outed due to accusations of bullying (and later excused for those accusations.
Based on the evidence he (Mark) has, Driscoll was named a bully.
But he, Mark, doesn’t actively accuse Driscoll of being a bully.
Regardless, his point that the church was being unfairly forgiving of him while rejecting Rob Bell still stands. Because both should have been forgiven & re-accepted, but they weren’t.

“There is often more concern about theology than character.”
I do agree this is an issue.
And It will always be an issue- just look at history.
We are waking up, for the up-tenth time, that we have wolves in our midst, and the gates are broken, & the shepards asleep.

1.) Heresy is a sin, literally a choice that is deemed outside the greater community’s choice. It stand among other sins, some of which are just as harmful for the Christian church. (See clergy abuse in the Catholic Church.)
2.) Rob Bell did not preach heresy or make a choice regarding it in his book, nor from the pulpit. He questioned whether a universal reconciliation based view of hell was in fact heresy.
3.) That question about the Christian view of hell has a long lineage in the history of the church. Many church scholars and historians don’t believe universal reconciliation was ever deemed heretical by the Church fathers (pre-schisms). For an excellent article in this regard, see https://afkimel.wordpress.com/2018/04/13/apocatastasis-the-heresy-that-never-was/
4.) Mark Driscoll was or seemed to be a Calvinist (he never seemed to be explicit about it). John Calvin was deemed a heretic by the Church (i.e., Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, and Church of the East). Preaching Calvinist doctrine is anathema for many of the above faithful. http://www.crivoice.org/creeddositheus.html
5.) Arrogance, Bullying, Pride are sins that it is clear Driscoll engaged in regularly and was unrepentant about.
6.) Accusing someone of heresy is itself a moral choice. Wrongly accusing someone of heresy is therefore a sin. I am not saying you are doing this. But it seems to me there was a quick rush to condemn Rob Bell for merely questioning Evangelical teaching, namely that a non-Evangelical view of hell shared by many Church fathers was indeed heresy at all.
7.) Where I agree with you is that the Evangelical view of hell is the card that holds the Evangelical worldview up. By questioning it, Bell threatened the house of cards’ collapse. But is that heresy?
8.) There are more than one “house” *(denominational approach) to consider, and some houses don’t have hell as the foundational card and have been standing for centuries and even millennia.
9.) Lastly, a couple points about pastoral leadership. Bell was in pastoral discernment when he was writing the book and when it came out. He left a month after it came out, perhaps seeing the writing on the wall that merely questioning doctrine made you condemned. As mentioned, he never explicitly preached universal reconciliation from the pulpit. Certainly, he was questioning things while in the pastoring role. But questioning things doesn’t rule out being a good pastor, thank God. In fact, it may enhance your pastoral presence. Certitude is not a prerequisite for good pastoral care. Faith is.
10.) What does rule out good pastoral care is arrogance, bullying, and meanness of spirit… That is the heresy here, IMO.

“The Evangelical Church in my opinion is King of Cancel Culture.”
I would argue against this, if only because generalizations are dangerous & often skewed by our own prejudices & experiences, rather than actual fact.
I’d also argue secular culture is equally guilty of cancel culture & tribalism.
It’s simply because Christian culture claims to set itself apart, it’s outing of members is easier to catch, because the secular culture will point their fingers & go, “Look how unfair & judgmental the supposedly loving Christians are.”
And all the examples of Christians destroying secular culture, such as burning books or CDs, or limiting dress codes, or trying to ban books (like Harry Potter) are harmful & are usually acknowledged as such.
Burning books & limiting ideas is always bad!
But those are different than outing someone for their theology
The former are misguided attempts to keep Christians separate & pure from the world & focus on God & all that is good(and everyone appears to agree they are misguided.)
The latter are personal attacks focusing on theology & behavior & the consensus is less clear.
They’re similar, but there are differences.
But again, a little research & you’ll turn up similar outrages against Christians & their culture in the secular arena. And groups of secular people outing their own for speaking out against injustice.
It’s harder to spot, but it’s there.

Your comment reminds me of a truly excellent series titled The Great C. S. Lewis Re-Read, over at Tor.com (a secular publishing website!) The posts examine The Great Divorce were particularly touching, but all of it is good.
Related to this post, it made me re-consider my ideas of hell in contrast to an all loving God who died for us.
Also, I highly recommend ‘Walking on Water’ & ‘And It Was Good: Reflectionson Beginnings’ by Madeleine L’Engle.

Your comment reminds me of a truly excellent series titled The Great C. S. Lewis Re-Read, over at Tor.com (a secular publishing website!) The posts examine The Great Divorce were particularly touching, but all of it is good.
Related to this post, it made me re-consider my ideas of he’ll in contrast to an all loving God who died for us.
Also, I highly recommend ‘Walking on Water’ & ‘And It Was Good: Reflectionson Beginnings’ by Madeleine L’Engle.