Why Don’t We See Miracles Like the Apostles Did?

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.

presidente

Senior Member
May 29, 2013
9,081
1,748
113
Peter spoke in his native tongue, the gift of God interpreting was not of Peter.


The gift of interpretation is not mentioned in that passage. It is hard to figure out exactly what you are reading into that passage. I understand every word in that sentence, but I don't get your point. I don't see anyone in this thread glorifying Peter or claiming that the ability to speak in tongues or for other people to hear him came from Peter.



That would blaspheming the name by which we called.
What would be blaspheming? And how is whatever you are talking about relevant to the discussion?

We are not have the faith of God, of Christ in respect to any person
God isn't impressed by the rich and powerful of this world. He doesn't exempt them from His righteous judgment. We are not to be impressed by such things. But what does that have to do with this discussion?


Tongues is a sign to those who believe not.


Divers tongues is also given to individuals in the body of Christ for the common good. The individual who speaks in tongues edifies himself. We know this is a good thing because of Paul's comment, 'I would that ye all spake with tongues'. It is better to interpret in addition to speaking in tongues or else prophesy, which we could see in Paul's other comment 'but rather that ye prophesied.'

With interpretation, speaking in tongues edifies the body. The interpretation of tongues is also one of the manifestations of the Spirit given to individuals in the body of Christ for the common good.

No such thing as a sign gift.
You say that over and over again. I don't know what you mean by that. I suspect no one else on the forum does but yourself. The term 'sign gift' is typically used by cessationists who want a category to put all the gifts they aren't comfortable with in so they can get rid of the whole category in their theology, at least as far as practical application in the church today is concerned.
 
H

HisHolly

Guest
The Apostles weren't the only ones who did anything.. Ananias who prayed for Paul was not one, Stephen was not one, Philip is mistaken for one but he's actually the one from the list of 7 chosen to serve. There are more.. folks discount their impact BC details aren't given and therefore those looking to be wowed are not
 
P

popeye

Guest
You don't get it, a false spirit can give a person a spiritual experience, even a powerful spiritual experience. Pentecostals think that because they are in touch with a spirit that the spirit has to be the Holy Spirit, nothing could be further from the truth. Show me one place in the NT where a believer in Jesus Christ, when filled with the Holy Spirit, fell over backwards as they do in Pentecostal meetings. The NT teaches a Christian to be sober, yet Pentecostalism teaches christians to be drunk. At the bottom of the day, just because you have a satisfying experience with a spirit and call that spirit the Holy Spirit does not make it the Holy Spirit...you must go by a truthful look at scripture.
Absolutely bogus.

We are GUARANTEED from the Holy Spirit and JESUS to be handed the real deal.

luke 11
9 And I say unto you, Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you.
10 For every one that asketh receiveth; and he that seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened.
11 If a son shall ask bread of any of you that is a father, will he give him a stone? or if he ask a fish, will he for a fish give him a serpent?
12 Or if he shall ask an egg, will he offer him a scorpion?
13 If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children: how much more shall your heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to them that ask him?

14 And he was casting out a devil, and it was dumb. And it came to pass, when the devil was gone out, the dumb spake; and the people wondered.
15 But some of them said, He casteth out devils through Beelzebub the chief of the devils.

Now....note that it is as if Jesus KNEW some would try and ASCRIBE THE WORKS FROM HEAVEN ONTO SATAN.

Also note that that is EXACTLY WHAT THE FALSE RELIGIONISTS DID TO JESUS.


How can you get it so backwards??????
 
Last edited:
P

popeye

Guest
WE KNOW WE RECIEVE FROM HEAVEN. WE KNOW THIS.

WE ALSO KNOW,SATAN CAN NOT ANSWER A CRY FOR SALVATION. THAT BUSINESS IS GOD'S BUSINESS,AND SATAN IS NOT ALLOWED TO ,rolleyes, GIVE SALVATION.

NOW,BY THE EXACT SAME GUARANTEE,SATAN CAN NOT ANSWER A CALL FOR THE BAPTISM IN THE HOLY SPIRIT,WITH SIGNS FOLLOWING.

ABSOLUTELY IMPOSSIBLE.
CAN NOT HAPPEN.
 
P

popeye

Guest
WE ARE GUARANTEED THE REAL DEAL.
 
M

MattTooFor

Guest
The issue I pointed out is that Acts 2 does not say what they said in tongues other than that they were talking about the wonderous works of God.
So...other than the fact they were teaching God's Word, you're unable to narrow it down? I appreciate the insight. I had thought they were telling stories from Dr.Suess books.

I have a 'word of knowledge' for you: The 120 proclaimed the Word of God that day and "all scripture is profitable...for instruction in righteousness" which is the essence of evangelism.


In I Corinthians 14, we know that other people did NOT understand speaking in tongues, because Paul wrote, 'no man understandeth him'.
You've slipped into a 'hyper-literal' interpretation method:


Absolutely, unequivocally...not a single soul could "understand"? Wait a minute - there are at least two categories of people in 1Cor.14 who understand the "tongues". First of all, the "interpreters" are given the ability to understand.

And thus we see the first cracks in this kind of hyper-literalism. A rigid, hyper-literal conclusion which says that absolutely "no one understands"...is a false conclusion.


The second category of people...are the foreigners in v.21 who are hearing the Gospel miraculously in their own tongue and God says "and yet for all that they will not hear me". The phrasing "for all that" indicates God has done something extraordinary and is nevertheless being refused.


The critical error you're making is ignoring the fact that Paul launches into a discussion of "tongues" in 1Cor.14 as though everyone already knows the basic definitions and descriptions of "tongues".


If "tongues" were something other than the ability to preach "the mighty deeds of God" to unbelievers in all the foreign languages...as opposed to what you're understanding from 1Cor. 14 (which is that no one understands anything that is being said)...where and when was that previously explained??

No, I don't think that [people who refuse to accept Charismatic "tongues" are unbelievers].
You are running from your own doctrines. I can certainly understand that. But your misinterpretation of the passage forces you to conclude that when a person rejects modern-day "tongues"...it is a sign he is an "unbeliever". It is stated even more directly in v. 21...(again, applying your erroneous interp method) where God says those who refuse to accept modern-day pseudo-tongues have thus rejected God.
 
Dec 2, 2016
1,652
26
0
Popeye, Your post makes no sense, you are still coming from the position that you have the ability to discern a false spirit from the Holy Spirit without specific literal in context scripture to back it up. You do not have that ability, neither do I, neither does anyone else, we MUST rely on the literal in context scriptures to discern the Holy Spirit of God from a false spirit. You underestimate Satan and over estimate your own ability.
 
Last edited:
M

MattTooFor

Guest
Can you name someone who went into apostasy over such things?
I named "millions". You cut off that part of my quote:
That's not to mention the HUGE apostatizing effect created by the gibberish, the wailing, moaning, shrieking, shaking "Azusa Street"-style mayhem. You were saying you had never even heard of anyone going into apostasy as a result of these things. You must be kidding. Millions upon millions of people have tuned into the televised "church services" with these inappropriate antics, or watched on YouTube...and have sworn "I will never EVER darken the door of a church. Those people are crazy".
You don't believe millions are driven away from Christianity by the garish, unseemly, bizarre "Azusa Street"-style antics and craziness? You're in denial, my friend.
 

shittim

Senior Member
Dec 16, 2016
13,607
7,644
113
Jesus spoke of the last days where "they will have an outward form of G-dliness but deny the power thereof".
Driven away from what He wants to do back to an outward form denying His power?
 
M

MattTooFor

Guest
Jesus spoke of the last days where "they will have an outward form of G-dliness but deny the power thereof".
Driven away from what He wants to do back to an outward form denying His power?
You have to realize, back in those days there was ZERO controversy among believers as to the existence of "tongues" Every indication is...anywhere you go in the NT...every single Christian routinely believed in the miracle of "tongues". Fast forward to today...I'm sitting in one of these Charismatic churches as a young man, and watching somebody spout gibberish. Why are there zero comments from Paul or other leaders, warning believers who are skeptical regarding gibberish?

I will comment more on 1Cor.14 when I get the chance.
 

presidente

Senior Member
May 29, 2013
9,081
1,748
113
You have to realize, back in those days there was ZERO controversy among believers as to the existence of "tongues" Every indication is...anywhere you go in the NT...every single Christian routinely believed in the miracle of "tongues". Fast forward to today...I'm sitting in one of these Charismatic churches as a young man, and watching somebody spout gibberish. Why are there zero comments from Paul or other leaders, warning believers who are skeptical regarding gibberish?
Why are there no warnings about gibberish? The only similar idea is the part about being a Barbarian to someone who does not understand you. Those who do not understand what is spoken in tongues may discount it as gibberish.

When Paul wrote this, cessationism had not been invented. Neither had modernism and modern liberal, unbelieving theology.

I will comment more on 1Cor.14 when I get the chance.[/QUOTE]
 

stonesoffire

Poetic Member
Nov 24, 2013
10,665
1,829
113
Popeye, Your post makes no sense, you are still coming from the position that you have the ability to discern a false spirit from the Holy Spirit without specific literal in context scripture to back it up. You do not have that ability, neither do I, neither does anyone else, we MUST rely on the literal in context scriptures to discern the Holy Spirit of God from a false spirit. You underestimate Satan and over estimate your own ability.
Discernment is a supernatural ability to see into the spiritual realm. What most who think they have this is just plain old suspicion.
 

presidente

Senior Member
May 29, 2013
9,081
1,748
113
So...other than the fact they were teaching God's Word, you're unable to narrow it down? I appreciate the insight. I had thought they were telling stories from Dr.Suess books.
I see 'teach' used of specific types of speech in the New Testament, distinct from prophesying or evangelizing in certain contexts. They could have been praising God. In Acts 10, those in Cornelius' house spoke in tongues and magnified God.
I have a 'word of knowledge' for you: The 120 proclaimed the Word of God that day and "all scripture is profitable...for instruction in righteousness" which is the essence of evangelism.
The scripture is profitable for righteousness. But, again, not every thought that a man has while reading the scriptures is necessarily true or profitable for doctrine. We agree that this passage is profitable. I don't agee that all the things you imagine while reading the passage are all true.
You've slipped into a 'hyper-literal' interpretation method:
When I point out a scripture that doesn't fit with your viewpoint, you accuse me of being 'hyper-literal'. But your interpretation is based on assuming things that are not in the text. We don't know what wondrous deeds of God the disciples were talking about in tongues. Asserting that speaking in tongues was used to preach the Gospel in foreign languages is not supported by scripture. Why does this bit of conjecture on your part weigh more heavily in your mind than the actual words of scripture?

It seems to me that you have a conclusion you want to arrive at, and you create evidence and dismiss evidence as you like to arrive at your pre-determined conclusion.

Absolutely, unequivocally...not a single soul could "understand"? Wait a minute - there are at least two categories of people in 1Cor.14 who understand the "tongues". First of all, the "interpreters" are given the ability to understand.
How do you know how the gift interpretation works? If the interpreter is given the ability to understand what each word and component of the language means, he's being given more than interpretation. After interpreting a tongue a number of times, he'd actually know the language, unless he lost his memories. Interpreting is apparently more than a natural ability, since the speaker in tongues is told to 'pray that he might interpret.' And you can't rule out that interpretation comes like a prophecy, without the interpreter knowing the actual words of what is spoken in tongue. For example, he may not be able to break it down and way 'Eta means with'. But he gets a message that is interpreted. Actually, this is the experience of many who interpret tongues. And sometimes two people get the same interpretation and one of them gives the interpretation before the other one does.

And thus we see the first cracks in this kind of hyper-literalism. A rigid, hyper-literal conclusion which says that absolutely "no one understands"...is a false conclusion.
One whom the Spirit enables to interpret the tongue can understand what it means, however that comes to him, and the congregation can understand if the tongue is interpreted. But all of this is clarified right there in the text. I have never argued that tongues cannot be interpreted, and you can check back over my previous posts to see my references to interpretation of tongues in I Corinthians 14. What we should not do is interject other people who understand the tongue into the text when the text does not mention it. Paul says 'no man understandeth him' and makes it clear that the tongue can be interpreted so the church can be edified. But to interject the idea into the text that the people present do naturally understand is to contradict what Paul says.
The second category of people...are the foreigners in v.21 who are hearing the Gospel miraculously in their own tongue
Those people aren't in the passage. You are contradict Paul where he says 'No man understandeth him.' Besides, in verse 21, the ones you call 'foreigners' are the ones doing the speaking in tongues.

I'll suggest you do something, and I'll do the same. Ask God for His Spirit to give you wisdom when you read the passage, and then really try to understand what the passage is saying. Try to understand instead of trying to find ways to use the passage to argue for a conclusion you already hold to.

and God says "and yet for all that they will not hear me". The phrasing "for all that" indicates God has done something extraordinary and is nevertheless being refused.
Having someone speak a foreign language fits 'for all that.' The short-term fulfillment of the prophecy was that the Assyrians took Israel captive and marched them naked away from their homeland, speaking to them in a foreign language or foreign languages. The Israelites probably heard in Aramaic and Assyrian, "Get back in line. March faster. Bwahahaha." or something like that. The Israelites did not have to understand Aramaic (which was not mutually inteligible with Hebrew) or Assyrian.

Btw, why do you think those who hear speaking in tongues will say 'ye are mad' if they understand what is being said?
The critical error you're making is ignoring the fact that Paul launches into a discussion of "tongues" in 1Cor.14 as though everyone already knows the basic definitions and descriptions of "tongues".

If "tongues" were something other than the ability to preach "the mighty deeds of God" to unbelievers in all the foreign languages...as opposed to what you're understanding from 1Cor. 14 (which is that no one understands anything that is being said)...where and when was that previously explained??
"Tongue" means either the organ in the mouth or a foreign language. Paul is talking about the gift of being able to speak a language. They knew what that meant because they spoke and read Greek. They also had had experience with this since the Holy Spirit had gifted some of them with this gift and other gifts. Paul may also have taught them in person, before. Paul does refer to his in-person teachings in some epistles. We see that he ministered in Corinth for some time. They could have witnessed tongues and interpretation in the ministry of Paul, Silas, and Timothy, also.

"Tongue" does not mean 'to speak of 'the mighty deeds of God' since there are millions of things one might say in a language. Speaking of the mighty deeds of God is one type of thing one might say in a foreign language. I don't believe people talked about their grocery lists while speaking in tongues. My point is that your definition of 'tongues' is not inherent in the meaning of the Greek word.

It is also extremely unlikely the Corinthians had access to fragments of Acts 2. Luke wrote it some time after the events of the last chapter in the book. It is possible they heard an account of what happened in Acts 2, but we do not know.

The gift in I Corinthians 12 is divers tongues. Other people being present to understand is not the gift. Speaking in other languages in the gift. Having people present to understand is something God can sovereignly do, but it is not a part of the gift. In I Corinthians 14, we see speaking in tongues and the gift of interpretation. Interpretation is needed because others present do NOT understand.
You are running from your own doctrines. I can certainly understand that. But your misinterpretation of the passage forces you to conclude that when a person rejects modern-day "tongues"...it is a sign he is an "unbeliever". It is stated even more directly in v. 21...(again, applying your erroneous interp method) where God says those who refuse to accept modern-day pseudo-tongues have thus rejected God.
No, you are just applying poor logic. It reminds me of this type of reasoning:

"If a man eats 2 kilos of meth amphetamine, he will die. George Washington died. So he must have eaten 2 kilos of meth amphetamine." George Washington had a fever and either died of that or the medical treatment he received for the fever (bleeding).

The verse in question is about the unbeliever or unlearned rejecting speaking in tongues and saying 'ye are mad.'

But notice there is another category there besides unbeliever, the unlearned. There is also the one who would be ignorant, mentioned at the end of the chapter.
 
M

MattTooFor

Guest
Why are there no warnings about gibberish? The only similar idea is the part about being a Barbarian
You didn't answer the question. And the reason you didn't answer the question is...given your erroneous interp method, there is no good explanation for why there was ZERO controversy among believers regarding the existence of the miraculous gift of tongues.

I didn't ask about "barbarians". I asked why there was zero controversy among believers.

The answer to my question as to why there was zero debate over the existence of "tongues"...is that there was no opportunity for controversy...and unlike today, the supernatural aspect of "tongues" was obviously unquestionable and unmistakble...and was being observed, apparently, innumerable times (given Paul's descriptions of the frequency of usage).

This is in contrast to modern-day where there is enormous doubt about the current existence of "tongues". I have sat there in a "church service" watching someone make incomprehensible noises...and the first reaction one has is: This is ridiculous...embarrassing...inappropriate...and the furthest thing from 'glorifying to God'.

No such thing was going on among the believers in those early days. Why oh why is that? I wonder, wonder, wonder.

From the viewpoint of a non-Charismatic, your attempts at an answer are, unfortunately, completely patronizing: I didn't have to wait for "cessationism" to be "invented", lol! And "unbelieving"? There you guys go again: You need to categorize me as an "unbeliever". But then you guys shrink back in horror at the holocaust of apostasy you've inadvertently depicted, ongoing amongst non-Charismatics...so you then attempt to contradict yourself...and round and round we go.
 

fredoheaven

Senior Member
Nov 17, 2015
3,992
927
113
[/I]if I were you I shut up because your are ignorant, you haven't seen miracles, so why do you talk about it?


You said: if I were you I shut up because your are ignorant

By saying this, I think of these instances:
1. That’s too personal. I expect you to come up with a good spirit. Calm down if you may.
2. The Original OP says ‘like the apostles did’. Can God make miracles of today? Certainly yes but not the gift of miracles like the apostles did.
3. This is normal to a Bible Discussion, discourse, dialogue, debate or whatever you call it. There are contrasting ideas but we can do such thing in a well- mannered way.
 

fredoheaven

Senior Member
Nov 17, 2015
3,992
927
113
[/I]
I understand what is your matter,
it is normal for a true christian to see miracle, unless he should do a deep self-analysis

John 14:12 - 14
12 | Verily, verily, I say unto you, he that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater 'works' than these shall he do; because I go unto the Father.
13 | And whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, that will I do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son.
14 | If ye shall ask anything in my name, that will I do.
You said : A deep self-analysis, greater works

I say: Does the bible say something about that? I read the Bible, study His words, memorize, searched the scriptures, I grow with the Words of God.

The very thing that Jesus did to come here on earth was to redeem us that’s why He was called the Saviour. He came to seek and save that which was lost. Luke 19:10 For the Son of man is come to seek and to save that which was lost. He died for us, buried and resurrected. The message is the preaching of the cross 1 Corinthians 1:18 For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God., or the preaching of the Gospel1 Corintians 1:17 For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect. The preaching of the gospel is the power of God unto salvation that believes. Romans 1:16. For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.

Now that Jesus said about the ‘greater works’ since Christ is about to ascend to heaven and his physical presence will be not be seen no more is all about the greater works of preaching the Gospel to all nations, to every creature. Matthew 28:19-20 says to His disciples to “Go ye unto all the world” , the scope is greater than Jerusalem, not only to the Jew but also to the Greeks or Gentiles. Mark 16 says Preach the Gospel. The Great Commission is the greater works mention by Christ.
 

fredoheaven

Senior Member
Nov 17, 2015
3,992
927
113
[/I]

when Jesus went unto the Father, God give the another Comforter/Spirit of truth to everyone who is a true christian, it's the reason Jesus told that christian will do greater work
what are the work Jesus did???miracles,healing,...and so on
1John 2:6
6 | he that saith he abideth in him ought himself also to walk even as he walked.

Jesus said we will do greater than these, the reason you do not this is simply because you can not, and you don't know about this
Boasting of a false gift? I asked: Are you saved? That if you die today, tonight, tomorrow or the next day, are you sure 100% you are going to heaven? Salvation does not merely depend on the miracles the disciples have seen to the Lord Jesus Christ. Miracles cannot save, the gospel is. Miracle is not the Saviour, Jesus is.
 

fredoheaven

Senior Member
Nov 17, 2015
3,992
927
113
[/I]
if there is a false, there is a true
if you have never seen miracle, you are under the false christian, you are ignorant, so shut up
Mark 12:24
24 | Jesus said unto them, Is it not for this cause that ye err, that ye know not the scriptures, nor the power of God?
Yep and the power of God is the Gospel! Romans 1:16 and how many times you said to me ‘shut up’ for I can do the same of what you said but I do not. If you have nothing to say then learned to tone downed. But my tongue is of a ready writer. My hands learned to make war. Iron sharpeneth iron but you fail to do this in the spirit of love.
 

fredoheaven

Senior Member
Nov 17, 2015
3,992
927
113
[/I]
Mark 12:24
24 | Jesus said unto them, Is it not for this cause that ye err, that ye know not the scriptures, nor thepower of God?
if there are false, there are true,


if there is false apostles this day, it means there is also true Apostles--->1Corinthians 11:14 Doth not even nature itself teach you...
But the truth is there are no more apostles of today. The gift of Apostleship has long been gone since the completion of the Bible. True, they are sent one and Christian too are sent one to share the Gospel but not in anyway, the believers of today or some of today are Apostles like the twelve, or like Apostle Paul or Barnabas to name some as per record in the Bible. For a true Apostle must be a witness of Christ Resurrection. Those who handled and seen with their eyes our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ!

Acts 1:2 Until the day in which he was taken up, after that he through the Holy Ghost had given commandments unto the apostles whom he had chosen:

Acts 1:22 Beginning from the baptism of John, unto that same day that he was taken up from us, must one be ordained to be a witness with us of his resurrection.

1 john1:1 That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word of life;

There are false apostles of today because there are no longer true apostles of today...

God bless
 
M

MattTooFor

Guest
How do you know how the gift interpretation works? If the interpreter is given the ability to understand what each word and component of the language means, he's being given more than interpretation. After interpreting a tongue a number of times, he'd actually know the language, unless he lost his memories. Interpreting is apparently more than a natural ability, since the speaker in tongues is told to 'pray that he might interpret.' And you can't rule out that interpretation comes like a prophecy, without the interpreter knowing the actual words of what is spoken in tongue. For example, he may not be able to break it down and way 'Eta means with'. But he gets a message that is interpreted. Actually, this is the experience of many who interpret tongues. And sometimes two people get the same interpretation and one of them gives the interpretation before the other one does.
I don't think a full team of NASA rocket scientists could decipher what in the world is being said here. My point stands...that some folks in the congregation were given the ability to understand the "tongues" and therefore, a rigid, hyper-literal interpretation which says that absolutely "no one understands"...leads to a false conclusion. And I haven't asked to know "how the gift works". Why would I, for heaven's sake? I just know it works.

Besides, in verse 21, the ones you call 'foreigners' are the ones doing the speaking in tongues.
Fair enough. But there are still those who are understanding the "tongues" in this statement. That's what "yet with all that" indicates. God is saying 'I went to the trouble of conveying the Gospel to you in unmistakably miraculous fashion and "yet with all that" you will still not hear me.

So again, a hyper-literal interpretation of "no one understands" leads to a false conclusion.
"Tongue" means either the organ in the mouth or a foreign language.
I hadn't asked you to provide a study on the word "tongue". I was inviting you to discuss the fact that it is quite clear Paul proceeds with chapter 14 on the assumption that EVERYONE ALREADY HAS A DEFINITION for the "gift of tongues". Your tangent into this word study is bizarre, quite frankly.

It is also extremely unlikely the Corinthians had access to fragments of Acts 2.
Prez, come on. Who would be thinking they had sat down with an actual physical copy of the Book of Acts?? All the believers knew and had heard about...the events of the Day of Pentecost.

To any Bible student worth his salt, it is crystal clear Paul plunges into chapter 14 on the assumption everyone already knew the definitions and the descriptions of "the gift of tongues". Where did they get those definitions? Answer: From the Day of Pentecost events...and also from simply observing the unmistakable and spectacularly miraculous features of "tongues"...in stark contrast to the modern-day where there is NO miraculous aspect.

No, you are just applying poor logic. It reminds me of this type of reasoning:

"If a man eats 2 kilos of meth amphetamine, he will die. George Washington died. So he must have eaten 2 kilos of meth amphetamine." George Washington had a fever and either died of that or the medical treatment he received for the fever (bleeding)...etc.
Again, indecipherable. What in the world? The "even so they will not listen to me" of verse 21 is referring to those who have left the faith and/or rejected the faith. In other words, they are unsaved and hell-bound. According to your (false) doctrines, if I reject modern-day 'gibberish-speak', I am toast. Run from your own doctrines all you want.