divorced from scripture

At risk of treading on a very thoroughly scholarly man's toes, i have a good handle on the way the expression "The Bible says..." closes down engagement with, and discussion of, scripture in quite a destructive way. I love the possibilities in scripture to have encounters of God and the people of God. It's desperately exciting that just because the words say "Whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery" isn't necessarily the full picture or meaning of what's written, and how that facilitates discussion on the living out of scripture. I find that, in no way, problematic. I can be found to quite enjoy that tension and earnest seeking of Godly living amist all life's challenges and complexities.

What i do have a fairly significant concern over though, is where a situation arises in which one party presents a case for an approach to scripture that says "these are the words so, plainly, that's its meaning" and a responding party (who have a much looser take on divorce) are unable to respond in relation to the Bible. They may talk about complexities in life as it's experienced, they be able to talk quite easily about the nature of God as they understand it, but to be rendered completely detatched from engagement with the Bible bothers me. Surely Christian theology is only such when it is done in relation to the Bible, even if it's simply to disagree with what it says, at least that would show due consideration and an honest response. That would be better than to fluff one's way through biblical critique in a way which reveals that one's theological, moral or ethical stance has been dramatically transformed without referrance to what 'the Bible says'.