Acts 16:33 KJV
And he took them the same hour of the night, and washed their stripes; and was baptized, he and all his, straightway.
It is said the jailer together with his family were all baptized that very midnight.Seeing it was midnight and there was no pool mentioned in the prison complex where Paul was incarcerated how could the whole family be baptized without anyone noticing it if they had to go out
Is there a possibility that a different baptism was administered here?
Note the comments of Gill on Acts 16:33 -
and was baptized, he and all his, straightway; by immersion, that being the only way in which baptism was administered, or can be, so as to be called a baptism: and which might be administered, either in the pool, which Grotius supposes to have been in the prison; or in the river near the city, where the oratory was, Acts 16:13 and it is no unreasonable thought to suppose, that they might go out of the prison thither, and administer the ordinance, and return to the prison again before morning unobserved by any; and after that, enter into the jailer's house and be refreshed, as in the following verse; and as this instance does not at all help the cause of sprinkling, so neither the baptism of infants; for as the jailer's family were baptized as well as he, so they had the word of the Lord spoken to them as well as he, and believed as well as he, and rejoiced as he did; all which cannot be said of infants; and besides, it must be proved that he had infants in his house, and that these were taken out of their beds in the middle of the night, and baptized by Paul, ere the instance can be thought to be of any service to infant baptism.
I also note that Philippi was coastal city with good water supply so any of these very local bodies of water would have been sufficient for regular baptism, ie, submersion..
This question would not be necessary if the Greek word "baptizo" had been properly translated, rather than transliterated from the Greek. It means to be dipped, submerged, immersed. Every time the Anglicized word "baptism" appears in the English translations, you need to think "immersion".
Strong's Gr. 907 "baptizo", to dip, sink. Thayer's Gr. Lexicon, II. "...an immersion in water, performed as a sign of the removal of sin, and administered to those who, impelled by a desire for salvation, sought admission to the benefits of the Messiah's kingdom;..." Source: Biblehub
Sprinkling was never a thought in their minds.
Let's review a few Scenarios
Scenario 1
In Acts 8, Peter and John went to Samaria, baptised those people who had accepted the word of God, it reads:
15 When they arrived, they prayed for the new believers there that they might receive the Holy Spirit,
16 because the Holy Spirit had not yet come on any of them; they had simply been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.
17 Then Peter and John placed their hands on them, and they received the Holy Spirit.
The baptism didn't mention water, but the Holy Spirit.
Scenario 2
In his speech Peter defended the baptism of the Gentiles, the family of Cornelius, Acts 11:15-16 read:
15 “As I began to speak, the Holy Spirit came on them as he had come on us at the beginning.
16 Then I remembered what the Lord had said: ‘John baptized with water, but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit.’
The baptism didn't mention water, but the Holy Spirit.
Scenario 3
In Acts 19, when Paul was in Ephesus, he had a dialogue with some disciples, it reads;
2 and asked them, “Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?”
They answered, “No, we have not even heard that there is a Holy Spirit.”
3 So Paul asked, “Then what baptism did you receive?”. “John’s baptism,” they replied.
4 Paul said, “John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance. He told the people to believe in the one coming after him, that is, in Jesus.”
5 On hearing this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.
6 When Paul placed his hands on them, the Holy Spirit came on them, and they spoke in tongues and prophesied.
The baptism didn't mention water, but the Holy Spirit.
Review
Now, "What kind of baptism was administered in Acts 16:33?"
It was the baptism with the Holy Spirit. Whether water involved was secondary. But if water involved was no surprise, as the jailer's did get water, when we read
33 At that hour of the night the jailer took them and washed their wounds; then immediately he and all his household were baptized.
Immersion in water was unlikely, as it was said the jailer's household got baptized before Paul and Silas was brought into the jailer's house.
34 The jailer brought them into his house and set a meal before them; he was filled with joy because he had come to believe in God — he and his whole household.
From Act 16:30
"Sirs , what must I do to be saved?"
The jailer wanted to be saved.
Acts 16:33
"And he took them the same hour of the night and washed their wounds; and he was baptised at once..".
I don't think the jailer would have happily washed their wounds if he was still unsure or unsatisfied about his desire to be saved. Surely his heart was in fellowship with Paul and Silas as he washed their wounds. i.e. the Holy Spirit was dwelling in him as he cared for them.
Washing was a result of the jailer's changed life, and then came another outward sign of his inner change-water baptism. The inner work of the Holy Spirit comes first and later water baptism is an outward sign of the inner work.
This assessment of the sitation is parallel to Acts 10:45 and 10:47-
Firstly "the gift of the Holy Spirit was poured out" [baptised in the Spirit].
and after "Can anyone withhold water for baptizing" [water baptism].
