Acts 19:1-6 Paul goes and finds disciples. That means they are already followers of Christ. He says, "Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed? So they are already believers. If you are filled with the Holy Spirit when you first believe then why would he ask if they had received it? They said, "We have not even heard there is a Holy Spirit"! So he asks them, “then what baptism did you receive?” If there is only one baptism why would he ask them which one did they receive? They replied, "John’s." Paul said John’s was one of repentance. We have already received the one of repentance. When Paul heard this he baptized them a second time into the name of the Lord Jesus. When he did this it says the Holy Spirit came upon them and they spoke in tongues and prophesied. If they already had the Holy Spirit how is it that he came on them a second time?These men were not disciples of Jesus, but they were—like Apollos in chapter 18—proclaiming an accurate pre-cross message. They were like old Simeon, knowing Messiah would soon be revealed but not possessing the full story. The Jews were used to ceremonial washings. John's Jordan River mikveh testified that people wished to prepare for the coming Messiah by repenting. They became identified as disciples of John. Paul baptized them again so they could be identified with Jesus. The tongues testified to the unity of Christian disciples. These disciples shared in the same gift as those in Acts 2.
Every genuine believer ought to seek the filling of the Holy Spirit. It is a command (Ephesians 5:18- no tongues there). But do Spirit-filled people somehow have more of God in them? The teaching that the “inside experience” is something to seek sounds like first century Gnosticism—not the Bible. Is not the filling ministry a submission to the word of Christ (see Colossians 3:15-17 and its parallels to Ephesians 5), an equipping for service that always results in boldness and creativity and a few times resulted in people speaking in languages they had never learned? The filling of the Holy Spirit usually did not result in speaking other languages (Acts 4:8, 31; 6:3-8; 7:55; 9:17; 11:24; 13:9, 52, not to mention all the O.T. references). If the “more” of tongues was so important, why do you have a first century apostle putting restrictions on its use? Was Paul quenching the Spirit or was he pointing out that established churches need the work of the Spirit manifested by the exposition of the word of God (prophecy)?
There is more that comes after repentance. If there wasn’t why then do we see all the BELIEVERS getting filled with the Holy Spirit after they believed? It’s not required but why shouldn’t we get all there is to get. If it’s available to everyone (and it is) then why wouldn’t we want it? Part of the Holy Spirit's job is to comfort and teach, but Acts says He does more. If there is more that He does, wouldn’t we want all of it?