we are not speaking of errors but of the language. Apples and oranges.
But you are denying proper comprehension of the language of the NT to the people who spoke that very same language and on which, based on their understanding of the word to baptize, in context of times and culture, and apostolic presence, interpreted and implemented baptism as triple immersion, only to have this denied by people who are so far removed from that language, culture, context and apostolic mindset that they might as well be on another galaxy.
You are also discounting the fact that not everything Christ taught was written down and that it simply became the praxis of the Church.
BTW, hows your understanding of Hebrew. Acts 26:14
Not very good at all. But Apostle Paul's reference to "Hebrew language" is understood to mean Aramaic in this particular context.
Does your translation say Aramaic? My NKJV says Hebrew.
If you translation also says Hebrew and it is your church that says it really means Aramaic I would ask why your church would do that.