I think you may have run into a false dichotomy.

When you make the Bible, or any written word, the final arbiter of Truth, you subordinate Spirit to flesh, because human reason cannot encompass Spiritual Truth.

So, what value do Biblical languages, theology, philosophy, etc., have? Rational context; however, that context is, not a ceiling, but a floor. The mind is a starting place, not the finish line; but, when Spirit is forced to conform to the limits of the mind, it cannot by definition go beyond it.

I was raised in a rationalistic Christian tradition, and, but for the grace of God, it would have broken me, in combination with other negative factors in my life, because it proclaimed a vision of Truth that was impossible to live by. It sought to conform Spirit to the limits of human reason.

This does not mean that anyone who makes claims to having a deeper, Spiritual understanding automatically does. People claim all kinds of things, and it is entirely possible that people might use this truth about Spirit to try to shore up their defenses against their own fears.

The right thing for people with this sort of conflict to do, I think, is part ways, if they can no longer live with each other's differing approaches to Truth. St. Paul's words, about the kingdom being about power rather than words, are certainly true; and I have found that the Spirit is His (or Her) own witness.

In a response you made, infra, you made the statement, "The more I studied, the more I realized that the Bible is not the book I thought it was." But the truth is, there isn't any book that contains Truth. The written word is merely a mediator for the Holy Spirit, for those who will receive it there. You and I, human beings, are creatures of both flesh and spirit: a paradox, for we participate in both the temporal and the eternal world at the same time. Living within time requires rationality; but rationality fails altogether in the realm of the eternal. Rational context acts as a lens, focusing the soul in the direction of Spirit (or not); and that's all it does. It preps the soul for divine encounter, and divine encounter is where Truth resides.

Intellectual pursuits can help others as well as yourself, i.e. make you a better pastor; but in the end they are nothing more than carriage horses familiar with the road that leads home. When they speak, like Balaam's ass, it is the Spirit Who gives them speech; of themselves, they have no voice. They are only guides to direct encounter with the divine, which is where all Truth and all healing reside.

So, you see, you could be right in your conclusion, that control was the problem; but it isn't clear that your own orientation wasn't tainted in the same way. If each of you is pursuing control -- them with dogma and you with rationalism -- then both of you made the same error. And I have learned in my life that indulging a passion for control is antithetical to Spiritual life.

I hope this is of some use to you. Please note that I did not say herein that either you or the members of your former church were preferring control over divine encounter. I only mentioned it as a possibility, something to consider.