Biblical Theme Map — 1 Corinthians (English → Cantonese)

Purpose

This document traces the theological through-line of 1 Corinthians across the whole canon — where each curriculum doctrine originates in the Old Testament, how it is transformed by Christ’s death and resurrection, how 1 Corinthians itself argues the doctrine pastorally to a divided, culturally syncretistic congregation, and how it connects forward to the rest of the New Testament and to the Romans baseline already governing this Language Package. The purpose is to give Phase 2 translators a stable doctrinal map so that individual verse-level renderings serve the letter’s larger theological architecture rather than being translated as isolated proof-texts.

1 Corinthians’ controlling pastoral situation — a congregation embedded in a religiously plural, status-conscious, commercially prosperous port city, tempted to fracture along teacher-loyalty lines and to blend residual pagan practice with new faith in Christ — maps with unusual precision onto the Hong Kong/Guangdong/Macau destination culture this Language Package serves. This theme map is written with that correspondence deliberately in view.

---

1. The Letter’s Macro-Structure

1 Corinthians answers a single underlying question in ten variations: what does it mean for a resurrection-shaped, cross-centered gospel to reorder every dimension of communal and personal life? The letter moves through:

• Chapters 1-4: Factionalism exposed and answered by the cross’s paradoxical wisdom/power.
• Chapters 5-7: Holiness in the body — church discipline, sexual purity, marriage.
• Chapters 8-10: Liberty limited by love — idol meat, Israel’s wilderness warning, the Lord’s table versus the demons’ table.
• Chapter 11: Order in worship — head coverings, the Lord’s Supper.
• Chapters 12-14: The body of Christ — spiritual gifts, love as the greater way, order in prophecy and tongues.
• Chapter 15: The resurrection of Christ and of believers — the letter’s theological capstone and this curriculum’s core passage.
• Chapter 16: The collection, final greetings, and the eschatological cry “Maranatha.”

Chapter 15 is not merely one topic among many; it is the letter’s foundation stated last. Paul’s argument throughout presupposes that Christ is truly risen — factionalism, immorality tolerated, idol-feast participation, disordered worship, and loveless use of spiritual gifts are all, at root, failures to live as people for whom “he was raised on the third day” is the fixed center of reality (15:3-4). Translators should hold this whole-letter dependency on chapter 15 in view throughout, even when translating chapters 1-14.

---

2. Theme-by-Theme Canonical Trajectory

2.1 The Resurrection of Christ and Believers

• OT roots: Job’s hope of bodily vindication (Job 19:25-27); Isaiah’s vision of resurrection and death’s defeat (Isaiah 25:8; 26:19); Daniel’s resurrection of the righteous and wicked (Daniel 12:2); Psalm 16:10’s confidence that God’s Holy One would not be abandoned to Sheol.
• Fulfillment in Christ: The gospel of “first importance” (15:3-5) — Christ’s death, burial, and bodily resurrection “in accordance with the Scriptures,” attested by a chain of named, largely still-living eyewitnesses (15:5-8), climaxing in the “last Adam” typology (15:45-49) that reverses the first Adam’s death.
• 1 Corinthians’ argument: Chapter 15 answers a specific Corinthian error — some were denying a future bodily resurrection of believers (15:12), likely under the influence of a Greco-Roman body/soul dualism that regarded the physical body as unworthy of eternal existence. Paul’s counter is relentlessly logical: no resurrection of the dead → no resurrection of Christ → no gospel → no forgiveness of sins → the dead are utterly lost → Christian existence is pitiable (15:13-19). But “in fact Christ has been raised” (15:20) — the resurrection is a past, historical, verified event with a coming future entailment for all who are “in Christ.”
• Forward canonical connections: Paul’s own resurrection-body theology in Philippians 3:20-21 and 2 Corinthians 5:1-10; the general resurrection in John 5:28-29 and Revelation 20:4-6; the “firstfruits” image recurs in James 1:18 and Revelation 14:4.
• Romans baseline connection: Romans 4:25 (“raised for our justification”), 6:4-11 (union with Christ’s death and resurrection), and 8:11 (the Spirit who raised Christ will raise believers) already establish resurrection doctrine as Critical risk in the baseline, with the explicit prohibition on 投胎轉世 (rebirth-cycle) and 問米 (spirit-medium) framing. 1 Corinthians 15 is the fullest single-chapter treatment of this doctrine anywhere in Paul and must be translated as the doctrinal capstone toward which Romans’ shorter references already point.
• Cantonese-culture translation implication: Because Hong Kong culture offers several live alternative afterlife frameworks — Buddhist rebirth (投胎轉世), ancestral-spirit continuation (拜祖先, 盂蘭節), and 問米 spirit-consultation — chapter 15’s argument that the resurrection is bodily, historical, evidentially attested, and once-for-all is not an abstract doctrinal fine point but a direct, load-bearing apologetic against the most culturally available alternative explanations of death and the afterlife.

2.2 Christian Unity versus Factionalism

• OT roots: Israel’s tribal factionalism and civil division (Judges 12, the divided monarchy of 1 Kings 12); the prophets’ longing for a reunited, undivided people of God (Ezekiel 37:15-28).
• Fulfillment in Christ: One new humanity created in Christ, breaking down dividing walls (anticipated in Isaiah 2:2-4’s vision of the nations streaming to one mountain; fulfilled in the NT’s Jew/Gentile unity theology).
• 1 Corinthians’ argument: The Corinthians had split into rival camps identified with Paul, Apollos, Cephas, and “Christ” (1:12) — treating apostolic teachers as competing sages the way the city’s rhetorical schools competed for students and patrons. Paul answers not with a call to compromise but with a reordering of the whole category: the cross itself is foolish/weak by the world’s status-competition standards, yet it is the true wisdom and power of God (1:18-25); no minister may be boasted in, since all are merely servants of the one Lord who owns the church (3:5-9, 21-23; 4:1-7).
• Forward canonical connections: Ephesians 4:1-6’s “one body, one Spirit… one Lord, one faith”; John 17:20-23’s prayer for the church’s unity; Philippians 2:1-4’s call to unity through humility.
• Romans baseline connection: This doctrine has no single dedicated Romans entry but is the underlying logic of Romans 12:3-8 (varied gifts within one body, “think with sober judgment,” no member exalting itself over another) and Romans 14-15’s call for the strong and the weak to receive one another. 1 Corinthians 1-4 supplies the sharper, more confrontational form of the same doctrine Romans states more gently.
• Cantonese-culture translation implication: Faction language (分黨) must be kept distinct from culturally normalized loyalty-and-honor bonds (義氣, already flagged Critical under 義/righteousness in the baseline) — the letter names factional loyalty to a human teacher as sin, not as an admirable form of loyalty.

2.3 The Cross as Wisdom and Power

• OT roots: Wisdom literature’s contrast between human cleverness and the fear of the Lord as true wisdom (Proverbs 1:7; 3:5-7); Isaiah’s oracles against those “wise in their own eyes” (Isaiah 5:21) and God’s declared intent to confound the wise (Isaiah 29:14, directly quoted at 1:19).
• Fulfillment in Christ: The crucified Messiah — a stumbling block to Jews expecting a conquering king and folly to Greeks expecting a philosopher-sage — is in fact “the wisdom of God and the power of God” (1:24). The paradox is not resolved but declared: God’s wisdom looks like weakness and folly by every worldly standard, and it saves anyway.
• 1 Corinthians’ argument: Chapters 1-2 directly confront a status-and-rhetoric-driven culture (Corinth’s competing sophists) with a gospel that refuses to compete on those terms; ministers who imitate Christ’s cross-shaped weakness (2:1-5; 4:9-13) rather than performing rhetorical mastery are the true pattern of gospel ministry.
• Forward canonical connections: Philippians 2:5-11’s kenotic Christ-hymn; Colossians 2:2-3’s “all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge” hidden in Christ; the whole Gospel passion narratives as the historical ground of this “foolish” wisdom.
• Romans baseline connection: Romans 1:16 (“the power of God for salvation”) already establishes 神嘅大能 as a High-risk term requiring protection from feng-shui-power (風水嘅力量) or medium-power (法力) substitution; 1 Corinthians extends this into a fuller wisdom/power pairing requiring the new 智慧/愚拙 vocabulary, with its own distinct collision risk (Buddhist prajñā-wisdom, Confucian sagehood) not addressed in the Romans baseline.
• Cantonese-culture translation implication: Hong Kong’s commercially and academically achievement-oriented culture, and its religiously plural wisdom-traditions (Buddhist enlightenment, Confucian self-cultivation, feng shui pragmatic wisdom), make this theme doctrinally live rather than merely historical — 1:18-25’s argument directly confronts any framing of the gospel as one wisdom-path among several available spiritual technologies for success or enlightenment.

2.4 Church Discipline and Holiness

• OT roots: Israel’s holiness code and its repeated “purge the evil from among you” formula (Deuteronomy 17:7 and parallels, directly quoted at 5:13); the Passover’s demand for a community free of leaven (Exodus 12:15-20).
• Fulfillment in Christ: “Christ our Passover lamb has been sacrificed” (5:7) — the church’s call to be “unleavened,” i.e., sincere and true, is grounded in a completed, once-for-all sacrifice, not an ongoing ritual requirement.
• 1 Corinthians’ argument: The specific case (a man in an incestuous relationship, tolerated rather than disciplined by the congregation) becomes the occasion for a general principle: tolerated sin corrupts the whole community (“a little leaven leavens the whole lump,” 5:6), and formal, redemptive discipline (“hand this man over to Satan,” 5:5) aims at the offender’s ultimate restoration, not vengeance.
• Forward canonical connections: Matthew 18:15-17’s process for confronting sin in the church; Galatians 6:1’s restoration-oriented correction; 2 Corinthians 2:5-11, which appears to describe the same offender’s eventual restoration and forgiveness.
• Romans baseline connection: Romans treats holiness/sanctification (聖潔, 成聖) as personal transformation (Romans 6:19-22; 12:1-2); 1 Corinthians 5 supplies the missing corporate dimension — the church’s collective responsibility to guard its own holiness — not directly addressed in Romans.
• Cantonese-culture translation implication: Must avoid framing discipline as a face-preserving social-shame exercise (面子, 唔衰得) or as folk exorcism/curse ritual (放符, 詛咒); this is redemptive, Christ-grounded community holiness aimed at repentance and restoration.

2.5 Marriage and Singleness

• OT roots: Genesis 1:27-28 and 2:18-24’s creation account establishing marriage as a good, God-designed institution; the Song of Songs’ celebration of marital love; the prophets’ occasional celibate or unusual-marital callings for special service (e.g., Jeremiah 16:1-4).
• Fulfillment in Christ: The eschatological horizon of Christ’s return reframes marriage and singleness alike as temporary, penultimate arrangements within “the present form of this world… passing away” (7:31), with undivided devotion to the Lord as the deeper good either state can serve.
• 1 Corinthians’ argument: Against a background of some Corinthians apparently advocating asceticism (perhaps “it is good for a man not to touch a woman,” 7:1, being a slogan Paul is quoting to qualify) and others slipping into sexual license, Paul commends both marriage and celibacy as legitimate, Spirit-given callings (χάρισμα, 7:7), each with its own advantages for kingdom service.
• Forward canonical connections: Ephesians 5:22-33’s Christ/church marriage typology; Matthew 19:10-12’s teaching on singleness “for the sake of the kingdom of heaven”; Revelation 19:7-9’s marriage supper of the Lamb as the final eschatological marriage image.
• Romans baseline connection: No direct Romans parallel; this is new doctrinal territory for the Language Package, though it shares the baseline’s χάρισμα/屬靈恩賜 vocabulary (applied here to a life-station capacity rather than a ministry function).
• Cantonese-culture translation implication: Singleness as a legitimate, even advantageous, calling runs against strong Cantonese/Chinese cultural pressure toward marriage and childbearing for family-lineage continuity (香火, incense-line continuation, the drive behind clan-succession adoption/過繼 already flagged in the Romans baseline’s adoption entry); this doctrine should be translated with sensitivity to that live cultural pressure.

2.6 Christian Liberty and Idol Meat

• OT roots: The Shema’s foundational monotheism (Deuteronomy 6:4, echoed at 8:4,6); Israel’s repeated wilderness lapses into idol-feast participation (Exodus 32:6, Numbers 25:1-9, both directly cited in chapter 10); the prophetic identification of pagan sacrifice with demon-worship (Deuteronomy 32:17, directly cited at 10:20).
• Fulfillment in Christ: Christ’s lordship over “food” as a category (8:6, “one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things”) relativizes the idol-meat question theologically (an idol is nothing, 8:4) while the concrete pastoral situation (weaker consciences, real demonic reality behind organized idol worship, 10:20) demands love-governed restraint, not doctrinaire liberty-exercise.
• 1 Corinthians’ argument: Chapters 8-10 form a single sustained argument: liberty is real (8:1, 9; 10:23-30) but must be voluntarily limited by love for a weaker believer’s conscience (8:9-13) and by the exclusive, non-negotiable loyalty the Lord’s table demands against the demons’ table (10:14-22) — Israel’s wilderness generation is the cautionary type (10:1-11).
• Forward canonical connections: Acts 15:29’s apostolic decree on food and idols; Revelation 2:14, 20’s warnings against eating food sacrificed to idols at Pergamum and Thyatira, showing this remained a live issue in the early church beyond Corinth.
• Romans baseline connection: Structurally parallel to Romans 14:1-15:7’s weaker-brother/food-scruple discussion, but 1 Corinthians 8-10 addresses a sharper, more theologically loaded concrete case (actual idol-temple worship) requiring its own dedicated Critical-risk vocabulary (偶像, 祭偶像之物, 拜偶像, 鬼魔) absent from the Romans TM. See 09_cross_reference_analysis.md Section D6 for the full consistency rule.
• Cantonese-culture translation implication: This is the single most culturally load-bearing doctrine cluster in the entire curriculum for the Hong Kong/Guangdong/Macau destination context, given the real, ongoing presence of temple-altar food offerings (Wong Tai Sin, Tin Hau), ancestral-rite food (Ching Ming, Chung Yeung), and incense-and-offering culture. Teaching materials must handle this pastorally and precisely, not merely translate it as an ancient historical curiosity.

2.7 The Lord’s Supper

• OT roots: The Passover meal (Exodus 12) as the primary type; the Sinai covenant-ratification meal and blood-sprinkling (Exodus 24:1-11); Jeremiah’s new covenant promise (Jeremiah 31:31-34, echoed at 11:25).
• Fulfillment in Christ: “This cup is the new covenant in my blood” (11:25) — Christ’s death institutes and seals the promised new covenant, of which the meal is the ongoing sign and remembrance (ἀνάμνησις, 11:24-25) until his return.
• 1 Corinthians’ argument: The Corinthian abuse (wealthier members eating ahead and excluding poorer members, turning a covenant meal into a status-stratified banquet, 11:17-22) becomes the occasion for Paul to restate the Supper’s institution, warn against unworthy participation without self-examination (11:27-29), and connect careless practice to actual divine discipline within the congregation (11:30).
• Forward canonical connections: The Synoptic institution narratives (Matthew 26:26-29; Mark 14:22-25; Luke 22:14-20); John 6:53-58’s bread-of-life discourse (theologically related though not a Supper-institution text); Revelation 19:9’s eschatological marriage supper as the meal’s future horizon.
• Romans baseline connection: No direct Romans parallel — this is wholly new sacramental doctrine for the Language Package and requires the full new-term cluster documented in 08_core_glossary.md (聖餐, 記念, 新約, 唔配, 分辨主嘅身體).
• Cantonese-culture translation implication: Must be kept doctrinally distinct from communal temple-offering banquets and ancestral-rite shared meals, both prominent in Hong Kong festival life; the Supper’s exclusivity (you cannot share the Lord’s table and the demons’ table, 10:21) sharpens rather than softens this distinction.

2.8 Spiritual Gifts and the Body of Christ

• OT roots: The Spirit’s empowering of specific individuals for specific service in Israel’s history (Bezalel’s Spirit-given craftsmanship, Exodus 31:1-6; the judges’ Spirit-empowered leadership; the prophets’ Spirit-inspired speech); Joel’s promise of the Spirit poured out on “all flesh” (Joel 2:28-29), already fulfilled at Pentecost (Acts 2).
• Fulfillment in Christ: The ascended Christ, through the one Spirit, distributes varied gifts to build up one body (12:4-11), of which he is the Head — each member, however humble its function appears, is Spirit-placed and indispensable (12:12-27).
• 1 Corinthians’ argument: Corinthian pride around the more spectacular gifts (especially tongues) needed correction: all gifts come from one Spirit for the common good, not for individual status-display (12:7, 11); no member may despise or be despised by another (12:14-26); and even the greatest gifts are worthless without love (12:31-13:1), which is why chapter 13 sits deliberately between the two gift-discussion chapters (12 and 14).
• Forward canonical connections: Ephesians 4:11-16’s gift-list serving the body’s growth into maturity; Romans 12:3-8’s shorter parallel gift-list; 1 Peter 4:10-11’s stewardship framing of gifts.
• Romans baseline connection: 屬靈恩賜 (spiritual gifts) is REUSED exactly from the Romans TM; 基督嘅身體 (body of Christ) is a fuller development of the brief image Romans 12:4-5 introduces. Gift-lists differ in detail between the two letters and should not be forced into artificial vocabulary uniformity beyond the shared governing image.
• Cantonese-culture translation implication: Tongues (方言) and the discernment of spirits (辨別諸靈) require the most careful handling in this cluster, given active Hong Kong spirit-mediumship practice (問米); see 07_semantic_analysis.md chapter 12 and 14 entries.

2.9 Love as the Greater Way

• OT roots: Leviticus 19:18’s “love your neighbor as yourself” (thematically echoed, though not directly quoted, in ch.13; directly quoted in Romans 13:9); Deuteronomy 6:5’s command to love God fully; Hosea’s covenant-love (חֶסֶד/ḥesed) as the pattern of God’s own faithful love toward an unfaithful people.
• Fulfillment in Christ: Christ’s self-giving death is agapē’s definitive historical demonstration (cf. Romans 5:8, “God shows his love for us in that… Christ died for us”), and 1 Corinthians 13 describes the character this same love produces in believers.
• 1 Corinthians’ argument: Placed deliberately between the two spiritual-gifts chapters (12 and 14), chapter 13 argues that love is not one gift among the gifts but the necessary medium through which every gift must operate to have any value at all — prophecy, tongues, knowledge, even self-sacrifice, all “gain nothing” without love (13:1-3). Love’s description (13:4-7) is behavioral and active, not sentimental.
• Forward canonical connections: John 13:34-35’s “new commandment”; 1 John 4:7-21’s extended meditation on God’s love as the source and pattern of Christian love; Galatians 5:22’s love as the first fruit of the Spirit.
• Romans baseline connection: Romans 12:9-10 and 13:8-10 treat love more briefly, with 13:9 directly quoting Leviticus 19:18; 1 Corinthians 13 is the fuller, more developed treatment and should be understood as elaborating what Romans states compactly. 愛 (agapē) is a new standalone term for this Language Package; recommend retroactive addition to a cross-curriculum core glossary.
• Cantonese-culture translation implication: Must be sharply distinguished from romantic love (愛情), casual affection/liking (鍾意), and Confucian relational-duty benevolence (仁, and the loyalty-and-honor idiom 義氣 already flagged Critical in the baseline); agapē is unconditional, self-giving, active goodwill toward all, not primarily an emotion, a romantic bond, or a reciprocal social obligation.

2.10 Order in Worship

• OT roots: The meticulous ordering of Israel’s tabernacle/temple worship (Exodus 25-31; Leviticus throughout) as an expression of God’s own character as “not a God of confusion but of peace” (14:33); the created order of Genesis 1-2, drawn on in the disputed head/head-covering discussion (11:3, 7-9).
• Fulfillment in Christ: The church’s worship, though no longer structured by Levitical ritual, must still reflect God’s own orderly, peace-giving character; every gift and every voice in the gathering serves the single criterion of building up the whole body (14:26).
• 1 Corinthians’ argument: Chapters 11 and 14 address two distinct worship-order problems — head coverings/gender-relations practice (11:2-16) and disorderly, competitive use of tongues and prophecy (14:1-40) — both resolved by appeal to the same underlying principle: worship must be intelligible, edifying, and peaceable, not self-display.
• Forward canonical connections: 1 Timothy 2:8-15 and Titus 2:1-5’s related household/worship-order instructions; Ephesians 5:21-33’s household-order teaching drawing on similar headship language.
• Romans baseline connection: No direct Romans parallel; this is new territory. The “head” (κεφαλή) and “let women be silent” (14:34-35) passages are flagged Critical/High for human theologian review per the genuine, ongoing interpretive debate among evangelical scholars regarding scope and application — this Language Package’s translation requirements deliberately preserve rather than resolve that debate (see 08_core_glossary.md Section B, entries “head” and “let women be silent”).
• Cantonese-culture translation implication: The head-covering practice (11:5-6, 13) has no living cultural equivalent in Hong Kong and requires historical-cultural framing notes to prevent reader confusion, distinct from the doctrinal-collision risks that dominate most other clusters in this curriculum.

---

3. Cross-Doctrine Integration: How the Ten Themes Cohere Around the Core Passage

1 Corinthians 15:1-11 functions as the letter’s theological keystone, and each of the other nine doctrines can be shown to depend on it:

Doctrine	Dependence on the resurrection (ch. 15)
Christian Unity versus Factionalism	The apostles’ unified testimony to one gospel (15:11, “whether then it was I or they, so we preach”) models the very unity the fractured Corinthians lack.
The Cross as Wisdom and Power	The resurrection vindicates the “foolish,” “weak” cross as in fact God’s wisdom and power (cf. Romans 1:4’s “declared to be the Son of God… by his resurrection”).
Church Discipline and Holiness	Holiness matters because bodies matter — a future bodily resurrection (15:35-49) means present bodily sin is not a morally neutral, merely “spiritual” non-issue (cf. 6:13-14, which explicitly links bodily resurrection to bodily sexual ethics).
Marriage and Singleness	The present age’s temporary, “passing away” character (7:29-31) is intelligible only within the resurrection-shaped eschatology chapter 15 fully articulates.
Christian Liberty and Idol Meat	Idols are powerless because the true God has decisively acted in history through the risen Christ; idol worship’s continuing danger (demons, 10:20) is set against the singular, exclusive lordship a risen and reigning Christ (15:25-27) now holds.
The Lord’s Supper	The Supper proclaims the Lord’s death “until he comes” (11:26) — an explicitly resurrection/return-oriented framing; without the resurrection there is no returning Lord to await.
Spiritual Gifts and the Body of Christ	The gifts are given by the ascended, reigning Christ (implied by 15:25’s present reign) through the Spirit poured out because he was raised and exalted.
Love as the Greater Way	Love “never ends” (13:8) precisely because it belongs to the permanent, resurrection age, unlike prophecy, tongues, and knowledge, which “will pass away” — chapter 13’s eschatology is chapter 15’s eschatology.
Order in Worship	Worship “decently and in order” anticipates the ordered, peaceable new-creation reality the resurrection guarantees, rather than the present age’s disorder.

Phase 2 translators should treat this integration as load-bearing: even when translating chapters 1-14 in isolation, the resurrection horizon of chapter 15 should inform tone, register, and doctrinal framing throughout, exactly as the letter’s own compositional structure intends.

---

4. Summary Table: Doctrine-to-Canon Quick Reference

Doctrine	Key OT anchor	Key NT/canonical trajectory	Key Romans parallel
Resurrection of Christ and Believers	Isaiah 25:8; Psalm 16:10; Genesis 2:7 (Adam typology)	John 5:28-29; Philippians 3:20-21; Revelation 20:4-6	Romans 4:25; 6:4-11; 8:11
Christian Unity versus Factionalism	Ezekiel 37:15-28	Ephesians 4:1-6; John 17:20-23	Romans 12:3-8; 14:1-15:7
The Cross as Wisdom and Power	Isaiah 29:14; Proverbs 1:7	Philippians 2:5-11; Colossians 2:2-3	Romans 1:16
Church Discipline and Holiness	Deuteronomy 17:7; Exodus 12:15-20	Matthew 18:15-17; 2 Corinthians 2:5-11	Romans 6:19-22; 12:1-2
Marriage and Singleness	Genesis 1:27-28; 2:18-24	Ephesians 5:22-33; Matthew 19:10-12	(no direct parallel)
Christian Liberty and Idol Meat	Deuteronomy 6:4; 32:17; Exodus 32:6	Acts 15:29; Revelation 2:14, 20	Romans 14:1-15:7
The Lord’s Supper	Exodus 12; 24:1-11; Jeremiah 31:31-34	Matthew 26:26-29; Revelation 19:9	(no direct parallel)
Spiritual Gifts and the Body of Christ	Joel 2:28-29; Exodus 31:1-6	Ephesians 4:11-16; 1 Peter 4:10-11	Romans 12:3-8
Love as the Greater Way	Leviticus 19:18; Hosea’s ḥesed	John 13:34-35; 1 John 4:7-21	Romans 12:9-10; 13:8-10
Order in Worship	Exodus 25-31; Genesis 1-2	1 Timothy 2:8-15; Ephesians 5:21-33	(no direct parallel)

---

Load this document alongside 09_cross_reference_analysis.md before proceeding to Phase 1 Step 4 (doctrine risk registry extension). This theme map governs the doctrinal framing notes to be attached to Critical- and High-risk segments in Phase 2 translation.