Executive Summary

Why it matters

Romans is the theological backbone of the New Testament, and Bengali carries a doctrinal-translation risk profile unlike any other language in this pipeline: it must simultaneously guard against Hindu syncretism (mukti, moksho, avatar, shakti) for its Hindu-heritage readers in West Bengal and against a distinct, real missiological debate over Muslim-idiom vocabulary (Isa, Allah, Injil, najat) for its readers in Muslim-majority Bangladesh. No other language package in this batch has to hold two separate religious-vocabulary risk systems in view for the same curriculum at once.

Key findings

• The registry tracks 40 doctrines across Romans 1-16; 29 require mandatory human theologian review before any translated segment ships (7 Critical, 22 High).
• Salvation, incarnation, resurrection, and the deity/sonship of Christ are Critical-risk because Bengali has ready-made religious vocabulary from both directions — মুক্তি/মোক্ষ/অবতার from Hindu tradition and নাজাত/ঈসা-only-a-prophet from Islamic tradition — that each independently contradicts the doctrine.
• Bengali’s own Bible translation history shows a real precedent failure: older Bengali Bible editions rendered “saints” as সাধুগণ, borrowing the Hindu/Jain ascetic-renunciate image; this Language Package deliberately breaks from that precedent.
• Sonship of Christ carries a pastoral risk specific to this language: Muslim-background readers often hear “Son of God” as a claim of literal biological descent, which Islamic theology explicitly and forcefully rejects as shirk — this requires proactive translator notes, not just correct vocabulary.

Risks

• Dual syncretism risk: unlike single-religious-context languages, Bengali translators must check every Critical term against two separate wrong-answer sets, one Hindu-coded and one Islamic-idiom-coded.
• Shaktism intensity: Bengal is the historic heartland of Shakta Hinduism (Durga and Kali worship), which makes শক্তি for “power of God” a stronger and more specific risk here than in most other Indian languages.
• Communal-identity softening: Romans’ “no distinction” and universal-accountability language directly challenges not just caste hierarchy but inherited religious-community identity, which is unusually salient in a Bengali/Bangladeshi social context.

Opportunities

• Bengali’s lack of grammatical gender removes an entire category of translation risk (gender-agreement drift on Holy Spirit references) present in Hindi and Punjabi.
• আব্বা (Abba) lands with unusual warmth for Muslim-background Bengali readers, since it is also the everyday Bengali Muslim word for “father” — an opportunity this curriculum can lean into rather than needing to explain as a foreign term.
• Established Bengali Christian Bible vocabulary (পরিত্রাণ, দেহধারণ, পুনরুত্থান) already avoids the worst Hindu-syncretism traps, meaning the core task is disciplined enforcement of good existing vocabulary, not invention from scratch.

Recommended actions

• Route every Critical and High risk segment (29 of 40 doctrines) through human theologian review before publication; do not allow automated-only review to touch these terms.
• Brief native-speaker reviewers specifically on evangelism-tone sensitivity in the Bangladesh context, which automated glossary enforcement alone cannot catch.
• Require a mandatory translator note on every Sonship-of-Christ passage clarifying the relational, not biological, sense of “Son of God” for Muslim-background readers.