Wow, I was kind of surprised from the reaction to this post, but praise God it looks like you brought everyone together to directly oppose what you're saying in unity.
to be honest I think Acts 2 does describe what you're saying here. Let's read what it says.
2 When the day of Pentecost arrived, they were all together in one place. 2 And suddenly there came from heaven a sound like a mighty rushing wind, and it filled the entire house where they were sitting. 3 And divided tongues as of fire appeared to them and rested on each one of them. 4 And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit gave them utterance.
"Praise Jesus!!!"
5 Now there were dwelling in Jerusalem Jews, devout men from every nation under heaven. 6 And at this sound the multitude came together, and they were bewildered,
because each one was hearing them speak in his own language. 7 And they were amazed and astonished, saying, “Are not all these who are speaking Galileans? 8 And how is it that
we hear, each of us in his own native language? 9 Parthians and Medes and Elamites and residents of Mesopotamia, Judea and Cappadocia, Pontus and Asia, 10 Phrygia and Pamphylia, Egypt and the parts of Libya belonging to Cyrene, and visitors from Rome, 11 both Jews and proselytes, Cretans and Arabians—we hear them telling in our own tongues the mighty works of God.”
Now I can see a case being made that maybe different people were speaking in different tongues, like each group had someone speaking in their tongue, but to be honest I think the text supports what he is saying more. I do not believe this 1 event defines completely what tongues is, as in I think in different parts of the Bible tongues is described a bit differently that expands on what tongues is and is used in a believers life.
So as far as the way you worded it as if this is the only "tongues", as if this is what "tongues is", I do disagree with that. That does not have any bearing on my agreeing with you that I believe this is absolutely supported by the text here. In my opinion of course.
Whats funny to me is one who was "correcting" you completely inserted an interpreter into the text as if that was a FACT, and the text clearly and very specifically says "
we hear, each of us in his own native”, yet rebukes you and complete inserts an interpreter??? Please point me to the part where that is written.