I believe Paul received the Holy Ghost when Ananias laid hands on him. And I believe he spoke with tongues. I do not think tongues had to be mentioned every time people received the Spirit and spoke in tongues. Acts is a historical account. We read the Jews spoke in tongues in
Acts 2 and Gentiles in
Acts 10 and John's disciples in
Acts 19. Many non-pentecostal Scholars agree that
Acts 8 and the Samaritans involved speaking in tongues as well since they saw miracles and devils cast out, but something apart from that caused Simon to "SEE" that laying on of hands caused the people to receive the Holy Ghost. Once this has been established amongst the various ethnic and distinct groups of people, it need not be mentioned again every time someone is said to have received the Spirit.
And the bottom line is, as jfrog and I already discussed months ago, that it is not plainly explicit anywhere in the Bible that
Acts 2 had people receive both Spirit Baptism as well indwelling of the Spirit (as though they were two different experiences), any more than it is plainly explicit that everyone who is Spirit baptized speaks in tongues. To me, the principle of Occam's razor makes it more sensible to conclude that Spirit indwelling and Spirit Baptism are one and the same experience.
So the bottom line is one will find what one WANTS to find in order to confirm one's bent on the issue in all these accounts, including Paul's experience
Threaded Mode
