Let's stick strictly with the topic of the gifts of healing, tongues, interpretation of tongues and prophecy.
I think you mentioned that there was proof of these gifts in the apostolic error up until the 3rd century.
If I am correct in your comments, then let me ask the following:
1. what evidence past the apostolic era?
2. what about between the third century until the 1800's?
If you would do a little research, there are quite a bit of references to this sort of thing. I am no expert in that area, but I'll share a few things from my recollections of what I have studied.
If you point me to Montanists, they were heretical. Montanus said "I am the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit". What kind of nut says that?
Btw, what is your quote for that? But if he said, "Thus saith the Lord" before it, it sounds a little less nutty, I suppose. Moses said, "I am the LORD thy God...." quoting the Lord God. I wonder if the assertion that Montanus called himself the Paraklete was misinterpreted, if he'd say "The Paraklete says' imitating, along the lines of Agabus saying, "Thus saith the Holy Ghost." The 'Montanist' 'revival' in the west was accepted for a time. In the east, they may have continued to remain a part of the larger chruch, but not in the east. They say Montanus set up rival bishops, which may be the reason the movement was considered a schism in the east early on. Most of what was written about Montanus was written by his critics. Tertullian became a Montanist at some point, and some of his works survive. One of the beliefs Tertullian defended was forbidding widows and widowers to marry. I don't look at Montanism as something orthodox. But the church actually accepted the gift of prophecy
As a teen, I read the first half of Eusebius 'Ecclesiastical History'. In it, he deals with the Montanist controversy and numerous other topics. His fourth century work compiles a number of quotes and traditions from the centuries prior. Regarding Montanism, he records a number of quotes form his contemporaries affirming the gift of prophecy, but rejecting Montanus. After Montanus, Priscilla, and Maximilla died, there was a debate between a Christian and a Montanist. The Montanist argued that prophecy had ceased with them. But the Christian said that prophecy remained in the church, because the apostle said prophecy would continue until the Lord returned. This could have been a debate alluding to I Corinthians 13. Montanists may have been the first cessationists. They may have thought that Montanus or his teachings were 'that which is perfect.' The church did not interpret the passage that way, and I Corinthians 1:7 says, 'So that ye come behind in no spiritual gift, waiting for the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.'
Eusebius also contains some of Ireneaus' writings. Ireneaus, who, probably when he was quite young, knew Polycarp, was a missionary to Gaul in what is now France, and a church leader there. He wrote that he believed all churches should be able to raise the dead as his had through fasting and prayer. But he also wrote of brethren who had various gifts such as prophecy, tongues, foreknowledge, healing, etc. Ireneaus wrote a work entitled 'Against Heresies' in which he exposed many of the beliefs of various cults, many of which we would classify as 'Gnostic' today. In another work, he wrote about how rejecting prophecy was a characteristic of heresies. He lived and wrote around 200 AD, as did Tertullian.
Tertullian wrote an apology that made a similar point to Justin Martyrs' in the early 2nd century, that Christians cast demons out of people, even though the pagans recognized the spirits in these people as their gods. Jesus called casting out demons a miracle. Justin Martyr also wrote in his dialogue with Trypho, a Jew who struck up a conversation with him because he was dressed as a philospher, that his people had had prophets, but now the prophets were among the church (my wording, btw.)
The Shepherd of Hermas describes prophesying in the church in the 2nd century. No matter what you think of the work, it was read in some churches in the second century and shows that prophesying was still done during that time.
I have read (or read parts of) some books that tell a bit about spiritual gifts during the Ante-Nicene time period. I only had a chance to quickly read through parts of Burgess' _The Spirit and the Church: Antiquity_ at a friend's house back in the 1980's. He collects a lot of quotes from the so-called 'church father;s' (though One is your Father which is in heaven) writings and comments on them in his book. There are two other volumes that I have not seen, presumably about later stages of church history. I recall his writing that Athanasius had a reputation as a prophet and received a prophecy that settled an issue that he might have otherwise just decreed on as a bishop. _Evangelism in the Early Church_ by Michael Greene also deals with the role of supernatural gifts in evangelism in the first centuries of Christianity.
There are also a number of bloggers who have compiled quotes. It is easy to find lists of quotes affirming the use of spiritual gifts either doctrinally or affirming experience with them from the first centuries of Christianity.
I have also read about various historical figures who were influential in spreading the message of Christ around the world. Gregory was influential in evangelizing Armenia. He was also Ante-Nicene. The Armenian king converted before the Roman Empire legalized Christianity. Gregory was said to have evangelized the nation after being imprisoned (Gregory's father had allegedly been involved in the plot to kill the king's father.) The king's sister released him after the king was demonized and then Gregory cast out the demon. Jesus called casting out a demon in his name a miracle.
Many healings and miracles are attributed to St. Martin of Tours. His life was recorded by someone who knew him personally, not a hagiophrapher decades or centuries later. Many miracles are also attributed to St. Patrick, numerous healings and resurrections from the dead. The two works of his that historians recognize as legitimate tell some supernatural experiences, seeing a vision that led him to free Ireland, where he worked as a slave after being captured, and a supernatural voice telling him to return. He'd become a presbyter after he'd returned. His writings do not fit with cessationism. Historically, there are numerous accounts of visions, prophecies and healings. Francis of Assisi is said to have healed people, for example. I don't recall reading that the monk said he was prophesying, but it is said a monk told his mother that her three sons would be.... I forget the titles. I think it was one would be a duke, another a count, and the other would be a king. Since Baldwin I was crowned king of the Latin kingdom of Jerusalem, he ended up being a king. (A presumptuous title that his brother refused, but my geneaological research indicates he's an ancestor, so perhaps I should repent on his behalf.)
The Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox and other national churches have not been cessationist historically. Cessationism evolved in Protestantism over time. It is not based on scripture. There are those who try to squeeze some kind of argument out of I Corinthians 13 that does not fit the context. Others argue for it based on a set of anachronistic propositions about the role of scripture that cannot be supported by the scriptures themselves. I could not see any Biblical basis for your line of reasoning for cessationism in our discussion thus far. Are there scriptures that support your theory?