When I read the basic premises of this thread on my IPhone before I left for work earlier today, I expected to see a torrent of replies by the time I got home asking why you feel the need to attack the veracity of the Scriptures.
If we take your premise to its logical end, then we may as well discount the authority of the Written Old Covenant as it contained so much rebuke towards the evil and wayward practices of Israel. As for the Gospels, well, we may as well throw them out as they are a record of the ministry of Jesus toward the people of the Covenant who in the end rejected him. As for the New Covenant and in particular with that of Pauls Epistles, as he had to address improper beliefs and wayward behaviour within many cities, then I guess, out with the Epistles as well. If we look at the beginnings of Revelations where we have Johns prophecies toward several wayward Christian communities in Asia-Minor, then I guess we may as well reject the book of Revelations as well.
Lets see, as you feel that there are supposedly some more reliable sources around, I wonder what they could be. I know that there was a particular denomination that held power for around a millennium, but as they had introduced so many false doctrines and pagan practices then they are probably the last source that we would want to refer to. So whats left . . . well nothing really, so I suppose that we need to return to the Spirit inspired Holy Scriptures.
Christians have at their disposal almost two thousand years of history, comment, prayer, and liturgy to draw upon and yet these two letters, especially the first, are made to suffice for the regulation of corporate worship by many who profess a second work of the Lord's Spirit and various signs and wonders (especially speaking in a tongue or in tongues) accompanying that second work.
Disposal is rather an applicable word as I think that many of us would be more than happy to see the old ways completely disposed of.
[FONT="]
[/FONT]
It seems to me that the new testament contains twenty seven books. Of those twenty seven books the four canonical gospel contain records of Jesus' words and deeds from which Christians have drawn the bulk of their most profound theology. Paul's letters to the Romans and the Ephesians provide a foundation for answering fundamental questions about Law and grace. The books of Hebrews and Revelation provide significant insight into the conduct of worship in heaven and the pattern of worship that Christians are to follow. Yet some would have us abandon the history, some would have us overlook the liturgy of heaven, and some would have us accommodate both our practice and our doctrine to the culture that surrounds us. Is this what Christians are called to do?
It is not going too far to say that the church in Corinth was abnormal. In some ways it was pathological and because of that they needed correction. This needed correction ought to be useful for us as we think about our own church life. We ought not to be following the example of Corinth. It is not a paradigm to be elevated as ideal or near-ideal. Corinth was far from being an ideal.
So, if we take Paul's corrections and apply them what do we end up with? Probably something undesirable; not because the corrections are bad not because they are in any sense untrue or unworthy but because they are correcting bad practises in which we many not be engaging.
Wow! Heres the heart of the problem in that there have always been church-goers and even believers who have not been engaging with what the Lord would have us do. Just because liberalism and worldly practices have become the benchmark for many, that does not mean that the rest of us have to discard Gods Covenant with man and adopt the worldly practices that many denominations have enshrined into their dogmas.
If I may use an analogy - one does not take insulin unless one needs it, so a healthy person who reads a prescription for insulin and assumes that it will do him good if taken would be acting very unwisely, right? Thus if a congregation of today seeks to take the correctives Paul prescribed for Corinth then that congregation is at risk because the correction is only needed if the fault is present. I mean the same fault that Paul is correcting in Corinth.
The faults that the Corinthians had are those alluded to briefly in the original post; namely
- divisions
- immorality
- practical and doctrinal confusion about marriage
- practical and doctrinal confusion about associations with pagans and pagan influenced objects as well as practises
- Practical and doctrinal confusion about women and their role in church
- Confusion about conducting and receiving the Lord's supper - this was based on both liturgical and moral errors
- The use and abuse of graces given by the Lord's Spirit and an accompanying depreciation of the grace of charity (love) between the members of the church
- Doctrinal and practical confusion about Christ's resurrection and its significance
- Doctrinal and practical confusion about the time and the nature of a Christian's resurrection
- Confusion about what the Christian doctrine of the resurrection is and what it means in practical as well as theoretical senses.
If your congregation does not suffer from these problems then the prescription that Paul gave to Corinth is not for you.
For those who love the Lord and desire to obey the Scriptures, then I would trust that there would be many millions of us otherwise, we risk eternal damnation.
PS. I had not realised that that the thread on tongues was such an issue for you! 
