A Puppet of language?

Two days ago we had that rather stark reading from  1 Timothy 6 urging the readers who were enslaved to obey their masters. The Timothy epistles are, of course, on the list of not-so-sure-its-Paul. But from this text ,as from the texts on women in Ephesians and Colossians, and the Romans and other texts apparently about human sexuality are we to draw moral absolutes? Obviously not in the case of slavery - but that line between historically and socially governed suggestion and what is always true seems to slide around in different hands.
For every text which appears to be any sort of absolute (and remember that a couple of hundred years ago in this country, and more recently elsewhere this Timothy text was used in the same battering way) when it comes to gender and sexuality there is a perfectly sensible argument which says - look at the situation, look through the eyes of the original readers and you will see what the writer is talking about - and this creeping conformity when the pen passes from the hand of Paul to his followers in the later Epistles includes a greater social conservatism in the widest sense of that word - do not upset the order or we will be squashed like flies by might Rome seems to be the clear message.
There are well rehearsed arguments for all the passages in the Epistles about women and about sexuality - I can rant as well as anyone although I am starting to find having the Bible quoted at me rather naive and irritating. This is because I too can turn up at Church debates with a Bible and I can counter quote and what does this achieve - really? To use the Word of God as a weapon - and against each other - when all of us, if we a honest, are just trying to follow Christ as best we can.
Do I accept the Holy Scriptures as revealing all things necessary for eternal salvation through faith in Jesus Christ ( and there is a clever piece of theology from the Ordinal) - yes, absolutely. Do I think that the Word of God, the Bible, is the most amazing and liberating message ever - of course. Do I think that somehow God is the sum of all the words in the book - no - that would be to make God a simple puppet of language - and yet that is what we so often do - we parade our words, or someone's words, spoken centuries ago and say - this is God. No, I am sorry, but that is blasphemy.
I can only experience the God revealed in words through the Word, through faith and life and prayer. That God, that complete and utter God, that shocking and demanding God is revealed in incarnation - in a man, Jesus, who did not placate, who knew his place and time,yes; who showed patience and resilience, yes; but who ultimately chose a path which was to only conform to God's way and not that of humanity.
And this God, this God who speaks to people, who comes to all of us, more than anything this is a God of Compassion, of quiet conversation. God may be our shield and protector but when we start holding the Bible out in front of us in that same way we are heading in the wrong direction. Can we quote words of love when our hearts are set on the demise of another, or at least their point of view?
This is all so hard. We struggle for inclusion and praxis, we struggle to understand. We are angry. We are hurt. But God is never at our whim and His Word never reduced to writing on a sheet.