In a related question, it is stated that the practice of apostolic gifts declined during the lifetimes of the apostles. For example, Norman Geisler in his book Signs & Wonders writes (p. 137):
...the same apostle who could heal everyone on a whole island (Acts 28:9) could no longer heal his coworkers in the ministry. The apostles could heal a person born lame (Acts 3), but Paul could not give Timothy miraculous relief from a simple stomach ailment and had to recommend that he take medicine for it (1 Timothy 5:23)...the same apostle who once had the power to raise the dead (Acts 20) now cannot even raise his needed friend Trophimus from a sick bed (2 Timothy 4:20)
Does this indicate that there was a decline in the number of miracles in the first century? If so, how would continuationists respond to such an observation? Or, is this a case of the absence of evidence not being the same as the evidence of absence?