So a few more things:
The text of MN123 parallels the text od DN14, and both the D veraion and the M version have parralels (in DN14’s case, multiple parralels) that agree in almost every mythalogical motif.
We can take this as strong evidence for these motifs being presectarian, and in fact probably (see many of my other post’s) earlier than S and therefore “pre-scholastic”.
A few notes tho:
MN123 clearly implies that understanding conditionality is the real “miricle” as does DN14 so there really isnt anywhere in the EBT’s where the buddha says anything in favour of these things.
It is also clear that the buddha repeatedly claims to have been an ordinary human being and to have set off and studied other spiritual teachers as a youth.
They clearly say that they starved themselves and held thier breath.
They clearly say that they where suffering and unhappy before and not so afterward. It’s clearly implied that they ate slept had back pain could see could talk etc afterward.
None of this is compatible with talking babies and rape-repelling energy rays any more than it is compatible with having a tongue that can cover ones whole face, an idea, again, on the evidence of the ebts is very very ancient.
However, understanding that the first myths to be canonised by the buddhsit community where preciciely these things and not the dry, highly refined aggregates style combinatorics that emerged, naturally, in more sedate, urban, “study hall” monasteries in the generations that followed the wild arahants and thier first community of donors way back in the times of magic tongues and walking babies 
is a very helpful exercise.
That there After that first wild generation who actually taught rather than studied and the people who fed them and made up thier own songs about them, most likely at home in the village miles away from any living forest arahant, emerged an effort to collect all the material together, i.e to “canonise” both the mythologies and the “philosophy” and the poetry is perfectly natural and for systematic works, neccecerily scholastic in charecter, to emerge (in end of M and S) is again, perfectly natural.
Determining how to live ones life or how to rationally pursue happiness based on these texts is a difficult process and a deeply worthwhile one in my opinion.
However as has been pointed out by others it is certainly not as important as you and SuttaCentral are to me, as after all:
“Friends are the whole of the holy life”
However I would caution you against thinking you know what these texts say and mean simply by studying one modern example of them (i.e the pali) without engaging in the neccesary furthur study into other examples (like the chinese) and also comparative work understanding for eg, the jain suttas, the upanishads, the pre-socratics etc as well as and especially mathematics including logic and computer programming because all these things contribute to fundemental understanding of the context of these texts.
for example, sarāgaṃ cittan is clearly very old, and the telepathic abilities description very old and very important.
also, for example;
dukkhanirodh occurs in the canon:
V 6
D 15
M 43
S 150
A 55
K 84
B 81
while āsavanirodh occurs:
V 1
D 4
M 19
S 0
A 9
K 13
B 2
which is of course strikingly meaningless like all the other meaningless examples of the profound differences in language and content in S (and the ends of M, which are basically “drafts” of the full blown S project) and the other principle collections. because numbers are meaningless.
even more meaningless then must be the profound change in tone and thematics from the earlier focus on how do I conquer my own greed hatred and delusion to how do i escape suffering, from kamma and jhana to sati and anapana, and so on.
all that unsaid, to my mind, there is no more important piece of text in the canon than:
They truly understand: ‘These are defilements’ … ‘This is the origin of defilements’ … ‘This is the cessation of defilements’ … ‘This is the practice that leads to the cessation of defilements’.
Suppose that in a mountain glen there was a lake that was transparent, clear, and unclouded. A person with clear eyes standing on the bank would see the clams and mussels, and pebbles and gravel, and schools of fish swimming about or staying still. They’d think: ‘This lake is transparent, clear, and unclouded. And here are the clams and mussels, and pebbles and gravel, and schools of fish swimming about or staying still.’ Once again the pool of water represents the mind, but now the meditator is not immersed in the experience, but looks back and reviews it objectively.
In the same way, when their mind has become immersed in samādhi like this—purified, bright, flawless, rid of corruptions, pliable, workable, steady, and imperturbable—they project it and extend it toward knowledge of the ending of defilements.
the end of suffering is just a bonus after you have ended the defilements!
One more while I am at it:
dukkh:
V 159
D 162
M 572
S 1079 so more than V, D, M combined, close to twice as much as A
A 607
K 1670
B 2114
kamma:
V 1110
D 195
M 365
S 185 so far fewer than M, fewer than the equal length A
A 555
K 1386
B 1586
bear in mind we are comparing ALL the dukkh compounds with all the karma compounds.
the disparity in S is again, strikingly meaningless because numbers.
hope that helps!
Metta
