- If the gift of tongues is truly given to the church then it is given to some and not all (*1Cor 12:10,11).
I believe that is correct according to scripture. But let's not forget that tongues above all other manifestations was frequently seen to occur with new converts, in the book of Acts. But sadly, many in the church today have interpreted "some" to mean "little" or even "none". This is despite tongues being listed by Jesus in Mark 16:17 along with healing and demonic deliverance so tongues is relatively important and not an insignificant gift.
- The gift is given as a sign to unbelievers and should never be used for prophesy (v/22).
With interpretation it is more or less the same as prophecy. Then it becomes useful to believers.
- If the gift of tongues is exercised it must have an interpretation so that others can understand what is being spoken (v/5,13,27).
Only in the context of the public assembly if it is to be spoken for the edification of all. Tongues in church may be spoken privately between yourself and God. Tongues in private may be spoken without interpretation.
- Speaking in tongues provides no useful advantage or profit to the church (v/6).
In the context of delivering inspired messages , yes. But it is useful to the individual members of the church for personal edification, and through that mechanism may benefit the whole.
- Even if I pray in my spirit in an (unknown) tongue, my understanding is unfruitful without an interpretation (v/13-15).
Yes that's normally what a a strange "unknown tongue" means - you can't understand it.
- The instances in scripture where tongues (or languages) were used as a national tongue that people heard in their own language (*Acts 2:6-8).
That is only partly correct. The purpose of tongues was not to be heard in a common and understood language, but in a foreign language i.e. another or strange tongue::
Isa 28:11 For with stammering lips and another tongue will he speak to this people.
And if tongues was always heard in a commonly understood language, Paul would have no need to have said "pray for interpretation" ( 1 Cor 14:13).
Paul saying they should get interpretation, pretty much disproves the common myth that tongues is always in a common langauge that others should be able to understand, such as, in French to french people, and German to german people, etc, it's not meant to be like that at all.
- There is no evidence in scripture of any special language given as an angelic tongue.
But there is evidence in scripture to show that tongues is meant to be not understood. Tongues is not meant to be in a commonly known language but in one which is rare or perhaps even totally unheard of before in human history. The God who made many diverse tongues at the tower of babel may use any language he wishes to, and this is normally a rare language. I dont know what language angels speak, but I would think that humans are unable to utter it.
- All instances in scripture of angels visiting and speaking to man was done in a language understood by the recipient with no interpretation of the tongue.
Yes but I fail to see the connection between angels visiting and speaking to men, and the g ift of tongues .
- If any member desires the gift of tongues, the gift of prophecy should be encouraged over and above because of the understanding and edification it gives to the church (v/1-5).
That is true that tongues has more value in church. Yet in all churches which say similar, I have seen neither tongues nor prophecy exercised. It's a bit hypocritical to say, "prophecy is more important in the church", when those who say that don't ever use the gift of prophecy in the church. I think it's really a lame excuse for why they don't believe in tongues.
- In (1Cor 14) there was a problem concerning this gift that Paul had to give instruction so that things would be done in the church decently and in order (v/40).
As 1 Cor 14: 16 shows, it was not just about the gift of tongues, but a more general problem involving the use of prophecy, the chattering women, the doctrines , revelations, psalms. Don't blame the gift and think this means you can neglect it.
- No other church besides Corinth, in the NT, is recorded as exercising the gift of tongues in prayer or otherwise after Pentecost.
The fact that the Corinthian church did use tongues and Paul encouraged it, supports its use. I think it's a little bit hypocritical when people desire to follow Paul's instructions on love etc, but think they can disregard what he said about spiritual gifts.
- Paul gave no instructions to any pastor-teacher or elder concerning the gift of tongues and its use in any other church.
There is no clear prohibition for the use of tongues in any of scripture. But more a correction for how it is used, amongst other things, such as prophecy, due to a more general problem of disorder. Unlike yourself, Paul did not seem to have an issue with the use of the gift of tongues itself, whether privately or corporately.
- Caution or Exhortation - If the church come together and all speak in tongues, will not those that are unlearned or unbelievers think the church to be mad (v/23).
As I said before this was not a problem about the gift of tongues specifically, but the general failure for all things to be done to edify and in order. There are many churches who do things disorderly and don't use the spiritual gifts. As Paul said the use of the gift of tongues and prophecy was not the problem, he in fact encouraged its use, but it was a more general problem of disorder which ranged from talking women to disorderly presentation of prophecies and psalms and doctrines etc.
Pss 120:7) I [am for] peace: but when I speak, they [are] for war.