2) Tongues is the method God chose to bring his word to all people of the world in their language. This is why Paul said - For if any man speak in an unknown tongue (Greek, Hebrew or Aramaic), let it be by two (Hebrew and Aramaic) or at the most three (Greek) and let ONE (God) interpret.
Here is the verse in question:
27 If any man speak in an unknown tongue, let it be by two, or at the most by three, and that by course; and let one interpret.
I was on a discussion list in the early days of the Internet with a Greek scholar who had worked as a chair at a university. He pointed out that the word translated 'man' there is 'tis', meaning one, and that one person does not become two or three people when he speaks in tongues. So he took this to one person speaking 'by two, or at the most by three' to refer to something one individual was doing.
Apparently, many Bible translators who are also Greek scholars disagree and translate that verse differently. Maybe they consider his approach to be hyper-literal on the grammatical level. Be that as it may, if we are going to look at it literally like that it says 'in an unknown tongue' and not 'in unknown tongues.' Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic are not 'a tongue.' They are many.
His understanding of the passage, in my own words as best I understand it, is that in Greek the word logos can be ommitted by elipses. He took this to mean something like one person speaking two or three utterances in a tongue before someone else interprets.
He also interpreted verse 29 in a similar light. While, grammatically, it could refer to two or three prophets, based on analogy to verse 26, he was inclined to see 'let the prophets speak two or three' to refer to the prophets speaking two or three things... and let the other weigh carefully what is said.
I do not see how the Hebrew, Greek, and Aramaic interpretation fits with the passage. Seeing the one who interprets as God is totally out of left field. In chapter 12, he presents interpretation of tongues as a manifestation of the Spirit a member of the body of Christ might be given. He asks 'do all interpret.' In I Corinthians 14:5, he writes about the one who speaks in tongues interpreting. In verse 13, he tells the one who speaks in an unknown tongues to pray that he may interpret. Throughout the chapter, the parts on tongues and interpretation lead up to his instructions there in verse 27-28 about speaking in tongues and one interpreting. So it does not make sense to assert that the one who interprets is a member of the congregation throughout the passage, but suddenly refers to God in verse 28.
Incidentally, this is the only really long passage in the New Testament that really goes into detail on how to conduct our meetings. There is no reference to a pastor or one long sermon. 'Every one of you' may speak within the parameters given in the passage. The speaker in tongues and interpreter is specificially allowed to speak. Prophets are allowed to speak. Ye may all prophesy. There is no instruction here to have three hymns followed by one sermon, followed by a prayer, communion, and three hymns. Yet many religious people insist that these elements must be present in that order for there to be a real church service, but actually oppose the operation of the gifts the passage clearly allows. There is also the implication in the passage that the Corinthians did not have the authority to change the God ordained way of meeting that other churches apparently followed, because he asks, what came the word of God out from you or unto you only did it come? And he also calls his instructions commandments of the Lord.
