You are welcome to the interpretation - but it's not my personal one. Far better interpreters than I have come to these conclusions.
My version is in English, what language is arousin, and which version of the Bible do you have?
Arousin is Greek, and in this case I am using the Textus Receptus.
What about speaking in new tongues, casting out devils, and healing hands?
The same rule applies.
Christ is not saying that Christians should go out and actively invent new tongues just so they can speak in them.
He is saying that new tongues will come upon Christians as a sign.
He is not saying that Christians should encourage people to become demonically possessed just so demons can be cast out - he is saying that when Christians do encounter a poor soul who is possessed that Christians will be able to cast the demons out.
He is not saying that Christians should go out and deliberately injure or infect people just so they can heal them later for fun, He is saying that Christians will be able to heal sick people that they encounter.
I have long felt that the Bible, like the Koran, must be read in the original language to be understood properly.
The original language is extremely useful, but a knowledge of the culture and history of Israel is just as important in interpretation.
No one actually knows how to read the original language of the Koran - a good portion of the of the Koran is so obscure that people can only guess at what some of the words and phrases might mean.
It is not written entirely in standard Arabic - some parts were morphologically and definitionally obscure to people who were alive when it was written.
The Greek of the New Testament, by contrast, was fairly standard Koine Greek and there is not a single word in the Greek text whose meaning or etymology is obscure.
If I am not mistaken, every single word in the Greek New Testament is attested somewhere else in Greek literature, while there are hundreds of words in the Koran which never occur elsewhere in Arabic and many of which appear to be Nabataean.