Linguistic Gap Analysis: Matthew 1–28

Purpose

This analysis executes Phase 1 Step 8 for the Matthew curriculum. It builds directly on 07_semantic_analysis.md, 08_core_glossary.md, and assets/bible_term_registry.json, and it must never contradict the baseline translation_memory.json / bible_term_registry.json / doctrine_risk_registry.json. Because English is both source and destination here, “gaps” are not lexical absences in a foreign language but structural weaknesses in English itself: single words asked to carry more theological freight than they can bear, near-synonym clusters that invite conflation, and loanwords/idioms whose modern connotations have drifted from or inverted their biblical sense. This document (1) maps each of the nine assigned doctrines against the English vocabulary actually available for it, (2) identifies missing vocabulary and crowded semantic neighborhoods requiring explicit “fencing,” (3) resolves transliteration-vs-paraphrase decisions for Matthew’s loanwords and idioms, and (4) ranks the curriculum’s highest-risk ambiguities for Phase 2 prioritization.

Coverage spans the full book, Matthew 1–28, with Matthew 5:1-12 (the Beatitudes) as the theological anchor and heaviest-weighted passage, consistent with the PRD’s full-book-coverage mandate.

---

Section 1: Doctrine Vocabulary Matrix

For each assigned doctrine: the English terms currently available (from baseline reuse or the Matthew-specific glossary), their structural weaknesses, and the recommended handling strategy for Phase 2 content generation.

1. The Kingdom of Heaven

Available terms	kingdom of heaven, kingdom of God, gospel (of the kingdom), mysteries of the kingdom, keys of the kingdom, repent
Weaknesses	”Heaven” collapses the Kingdom into an exclusively future, post-mortem destination (“going to heaven when you die”), erasing Matthew’s present in-breaking dimension. “Kingdom” independently risks a fantasy-genre reading for readers whose primary cultural referent is Tolkien-style or “Game of Thrones”-style fictional realms. Two synonymous phrases (“kingdom of heaven” / “kingdom of God”) risk being read as two different theological realities rather than one idiom in two dialects of the same Gospel tradition. “Mysteries” imports a detective-genre puzzle-solving connotation.
Recommended strategy	On first substantive use per document, state explicitly: (a) the kingdom of heaven is God’s reign breaking into history now, not only a destination after death; (b) “kingdom of heaven” and “kingdom of God” name the same reality — Matthew’s preferred idiom and the phrase used elsewhere in the NT are interchangeable, not competing concepts. Stress the real, historical, ongoing nature of this reign per baseline’s kingdom_of_god note.

2. Jesus as the Promised Messiah and Son of David

Available terms	Messiah / Christ, Son of David, seed of David, David (proper name), Lord (esp. 22:44)
Weaknesses	”Christ” is frequently misheard as Jesus’ surname rather than a title, entirely losing its Jewish-messianic-fulfillment claim. “Son of David” presumes 2 Samuel 7 covenant background that most readers’ only independent David knowledge (the Goliath narrative) does not supply. “Messiah complex” pop-psychology pejorative can pre-color the term negatively.
Recommended strategy	Pair “Christ” with an explicit “Messiah” gloss at each significant occurrence rather than assuming familiarity. Supply the Davidic covenant promise (2 Sam 7:12-16) explicitly at Son of David’s first substantive occurrence (1:1) and recall it at each subsequent acclamation (9:27; 12:23; 15:22; 20:30-31; 21:9,15; 22:42), since the title’s rhetorical weight depends entirely on that background being active in the reader’s mind.

3. Fulfillment of Old Testament Prophecy

Available terms	fulfilled / fulfillment, prophecy, prophet (baseline), Scriptures
Weaknesses	Contemporary “fulfillment” is dominated by personal self-actualization language (“finding fulfillment”), reframing prophecy-fulfillment as subjective satisfaction rather than an objective historical claim. A separate, more corrosive risk: popular historical-critical suspicion (widely circulated in documentaries and casual online discourse) that Matthew’s ten fulfillment-formula citations were assembled after the fact to retrofit proof-texts, rather than genuinely anticipated beforehand.
Recommended strategy	Distinguish the self-actualization sense explicitly on first use. Engage the historical-critical objection directly rather than ignoring it, consistent with the baseline’s treatment of inspiration_of_scripture — name the objection, then state the curriculum’s own confidence in genuine predictive fulfillment, without pretending the objection does not exist among informed readers.

4. The Authority of Jesus’ Teaching

Available terms	authority, Lord, Son of Man, binding and loosing, render to Caesar
Weaknesses	Contemporary discourse about “authority” and “power” is dominated by abuse-of-power and anti-authoritarian narratives, priming suspicion toward any unique-authority claim. “Lord” has faded from lived, felt authority into archaic or fictional-genre associations (baseline).
Recommended strategy	Distinguish Jesus’ self-authenticating, non-derivative teaching authority (he does not cite prior rabbis, unlike the scribes, 7:28-29) from coercive institutional or political power at every occurrence of “authority.” Actively restore “Lord’s” felt weight rather than passively repeating a faded word, especially at 22:44 where Jesus’ argument depends on the word still carrying force.

5. Righteousness Exceeding the Pharisees

Available terms	righteousness, perfect, love (greatest commandment), hypocrite, Pharisees and scribes, pure in heart, merciful
Weaknesses	”Righteousness” (Critical for this curriculum) must hold together Matthew’s given status and practiced ethical sense without collapsing either into the other. “Perfect” triggers perfectionism-culture despair or self-help dismissal. “Pharisees” risks flattening into a cartoon villain and, given church history, feeding supersessionist or anti-Jewish readings. “Love” is one of English’s most overloaded words, dominated by romantic/casual-affection senses.
Recommended strategy	At 5:20 explicitly reject the “competitive moral one-upmanship” misreading — Jesus calls for a different, heart-level, grace-enabled righteousness the Pharisees’ external system could not produce, not simply “try harder than them.” Gloss “perfect” (5:48) as wholehearted maturity in love, not flawlessness. State plainly that Jesus’ critique of the Pharisees targets specific practices and hearts, not an indictment of Judaism or Jewish people as such. Distinguish “love” as committed, willed, self-giving action from romantic/emotional love at 22:37-40.

6. The Church and Church Discipline

Available terms	church, binding and loosing, keys of the kingdom, sin (18:15), disciple, blood of the covenant (adjacent)
Weaknesses	”Church” (Critical) carries institutional-decline and scandal-adjacent baggage in the post-Christian West. “Binding and loosing” risks an occult-magic misreading from contemporary “binding spell” pop-culture. “Keys of the kingdom” flattens into a generic self-help motivational idiom. 16:18’s “on this rock” is a centuries-long denominational contest point (papal-primacy vs. confession/faith vs. Christ-himself readings).
Recommended strategy	Actively restore “church” as living, Spirit-indwelt community, not a declining institution or a building. State the curriculum’s own reading of “this rock” (16:18) plainly and note the range of other major readings, per baseline Denominational Transparency Rules. Distinguish “binding and loosing” as a rabbinic judicial-authority idiom, entirely unrelated to magical binding/banishing.

7. The Great Commission

Available terms	all nations, disciple / make disciples, baptism, teaching them to obey, all authority in heaven and earth, Holy Spirit, Father
Weaknesses	”Baptism” (Critical) is one of the deepest, most durable English-speaking-Christian denominational divides (mode and effect both contested). “All nations” (ethnē) must be fenced from the Jew/non-Jew contrastive sense of “Gentiles” elsewhere in Matthew. “Disciple” is diluted by loose secular ideological-fandom usage. “Teaching them to obey” collides with contemporary Western suspicion of obedience as servility.
Recommended strategy	State the curriculum’s own baptismal reading transparently at 28:19 and note other traditions’ readings respectfully, per baseline rules; keep the Trinitarian formula wording identical across every curriculum document (baseline Theological Consistency Rule). Explicitly distinguish “all nations” (inclusive, Israel included) from “Gentiles” (Jew/non-Jew contrastive) at each occurrence.

8. Judgment and the End of the Age

Available terms	judgment, end of the age, eternal life / eternal punishment, great tribulation, “this generation,” wrath, Son of Man, election
Weaknesses	”Judgment” collides directly with the contemporary “don’t judge me” non-judgmentalism idiom, especially acute at 7:1. “End of the age” is trivialized by disaster-film and doomsday-meme culture. “Eternal” is diluted by marketing usage (“eternal youth” skincare). “Great tribulation” and “this generation” (24:21, 34) sit atop genuine, live denominational and scholarly disagreement. “Election” is almost totally captured by its political-voting sense.
Recommended strategy	At 7:1 state plainly that Jesus warns against hypocritical, self-exempting condemnation (per 7:6, 15-20 in the same chapter), not all moral discernment. Apply the baseline’s no-softening rule with particular firmness to eternal punishment (25:46). Note the range of tribulation-timing and “this generation” readings per the Ambiguity Handling rule rather than silently adopting one. Restore “election’s” sovereign-choice sense against the political-vote false friend at every occurrence (22:14; 24:22,24,31).

9. Discipleship and the Cost of Following Jesus

Available terms	follow, cross, deny himself, disciple, reward, persecuted, ransom, stumbling block, mammon
Weaknesses	”Cross” (Critical) is almost totally captured by the idiom “we all have our cross to bear” (any generic unpleasant burden). “Follow” is dominated by the passive, frictionless social-media sense. “Reward” is dominated by consumer loyalty-points transactionalism, risking a merit-based misreading. “Persecuted” is pulled in two opposite directions by culture-war weaponization and comfortable-Western unfamiliarity with real hostility.
Recommended strategy	Never leave “cross” (10:38; 16:24) unexplained on first substantive use — actively contrast the idiom with Matthew’s sense of total, public, potentially fatal identification with Jesus. Distinguish “follow” as active, costly, immediate, life-reorienting obedience from the one-tap social-media sense. State explicitly that Kingdom reward flows from grace and promise, not commercial merit-accumulation. Address both misreadings of “persecuted” (inflation and dismissal) in the same explanatory note.

---

Section 2: Missing Vocabulary — Concepts English Has No Single Word For

These require a standing compound phrase or paraphrase in every occurrence; no single English word will ever suffice, and Phase 2 content must not attempt to shorten them.

Concept	Why no single word suffices	Standing phrase to use
πτωχοὶ τῷ πνεύματι (5:3)	English “poor” alone means economic poverty; “spirit” alone risks a mood reading (“poor spirits”/depression)	“poor in spirit” — always paired with the gloss “spiritually destitute, wholly dependent on God”
ὑπακοὴ πίστεως-adjacent Great Commission command (28:20)	“obey” alone triggers autonomy-culture suspicion; “teach” alone loses the ongoing-formation sense	”teaching them to obey” (cross-ref baseline obedience_of_faith)
τὸ αἷμά μου τῆς διαθήκης (26:28)	“blood” alone is graphic without covenant meaning; “covenant” alone (per baseline) collapses to a legal-deed sense	”blood of the covenant” — always with the Exodus/Sinai background supplied
πᾶσα ἐξουσία ἐν οὐρανῷ καὶ ἐπὶ γῆς (28:18)	“authority” alone loses the cosmic, universal scope of the claim	”all authority in heaven and on earth” — never shortened to “authority” alone in this specific verse
τοῖς ἀδελφοῖς μου τοῖς ἐλαχίστοις (25:40,45)	“the poor” or “the needy” alone loses the specific Christ-identification	”the least of these” / “these brothers of mine” — always with the Christ-identification stated
δήσῃς…λύσῃς (16:19; 18:18)	No natural single-word English equivalent for this rabbinic judicial idiom exists at all	”binding and loosing” — transliterated idiom, always glossed as authoritative community judgment, never left to stand alone
τὰ μυστήρια τῆς βασιλείας (13:11)	“secrets” undersells; “mysteries” oversells (detective-genre)	“mysteries of the kingdom” — glossed as previously hidden truth now disclosed by revelation, not a puzzle to solve
θλῖψις μεγάλη (24:21)	“hardship” undersells; “apocalypse” oversells (pop-culture coded)	“great tribulation” — retained with explicit denominational-range note

---

Section 3: Crowded Semantic Neighborhoods Requiring Fencing

Where several distinct biblical terms share visual, phonetic, or conceptual proximity in English, readers conflate them by default. Each neighborhood below requires an explicit “fence” — a stated distinction — the first time any member of the cluster appears in a document, and a brief reminder at each subsequent occurrence of another member.

Neighborhood A — The “Son of ___” cluster (highest-priority fence in the book): “Son of God” (singular, Christ’s unique eternal deity) / “children of God” or “sons of God” (plural, ordinary disciples, 5:9) / “Son of Man” (Daniel 7 authority-to-judge title) / “Son of David” (royal-messianic covenant title). Four phrases sharing the word “Son” but referring to four entirely distinct theological claims. Fence: state at first occurrence of each that these are not variations on one idea but four separate titles with separate referents and separate weight, and cross-reference the others explicitly rather than assuming the reader tracks the distinction unaided.

Neighborhood B — The divine-summons cluster: “called” / “calling” / “election” / “chosen.” All name aspects of God’s sovereign initiative, but “election” carries the single strongest false-friend risk in the book (political-vote capture). Fence: introduce this cluster as a family of related but not identical terms, and isolate “election” for its own explicit political-vote correction each time it recurs (22:14; 24:22,24,31).

Neighborhood C — “Kingdom of heaven” / “kingdom of God”: Same referent, two idioms. Fence: state synonymy explicitly at first occurrence of either phrase per document; do not let a document use one phrase for several chapters and then switch without a reminder.

Neighborhood D — The Sermon on the Mount ethical cluster: “law” / “righteousness” / “perfect” / “love” (greatest commandment). Fence: these are not four separate demands stacked on top of each other but one integrated portrait of Kingdom character; state explicitly that “fulfilling the Law” (5:17), “exceeding” righteousness (5:20), being “perfect” (5:48), and “loving” God and neighbor (22:37-40) name the same reality from different angles, so readers do not experience the Sermon as an escalating checklist.

Neighborhood E — The judgment/end-times cluster: “judgment” / “judge not” / “wrath” / “end of the age” / “eternal punishment.” Fence: this cluster collides as a whole, not just term-by-term, with contemporary therapeutic non-judgmentalism; a single upfront framing note (Jesus both forbids hypocritical condemnation, 7:1, and teaches certain future judgment, 25:31-46 — these are not contradictory) should govern all five terms together rather than treating each in isolation.

Neighborhood F — The discipleship-cost cluster: “follow” / “disciple” / “cross” / “deny himself.” Fence: each is independently a false friend (social-media following; ideological fandom; a generic-burden idiom; pop-psychology self-erasure anxiety), but they compound: a reader who has quietly misread “follow” as low-commitment will then misread “take up your cross” as a matching low-stakes metaphor. The whole cluster needs to be corrected together as a single unit of costly, total, public allegiance, not four separate glosses that leave the overall picture softened.

Neighborhood G — The proclamation-content cluster: “gospel” / “gospel of the kingdom” / “kingdom of heaven.” Fence: clarify that “the gospel of the kingdom” is not a special sub-category of gospel distinct from Paul’s “gospel,” but Matthew’s own preferred full name for the same good news, emphasizing its royal content.

Neighborhood H — The Beatitudes’ ironic-reversal unit (core passage, Matthew 5:1-12): “blessed” / “poor in spirit” / “meek” / “persecuted” / “reward.” These five terms do not merely each carry independent risk; together they construct a single paradox — God’s favor pronounced over the very people contemporary “#blessed” culture would call unfortunate. Fence: introduce the whole Beatitudes passage with a single framing note on the paradox itself (blessing pronounced over poverty, grief, meekness, hunger for justice, and persecution — the opposite of a highlight-reel) before glossing any individual Beatitude, so the individual-term corrections don’t obscure the passage’s unified rhetorical shock.

Neighborhood I — The Christ’s-deity-recognition cluster: “worship” / “Lord” / “Son of God.” Fence: state that these three terms converge at Matthew’s climactic confession moments (14:33; 16:16; 27:54; 28:9,17) to make one cumulative claim of full deity — not three separate, lesser claims (respectful address + special status + honorific) that happen to appear near each other.

Neighborhood J — The contested-ordinance cluster: “baptism” / “church” / “blood of the covenant.” Fence: these are three independent Critical-risk denominational-contest terms that happen to cluster across chapters 3, 16–18, 26, and 28. Phase 2 content addressing one (e.g., baptism in a Great Commission lesson) must not let vigilance lapse on the others simply because one has already been “handled” in that document; each requires its own explicit denominational-transparency statement wherever it independently occurs.

---

Section 4: Transliteration vs. Paraphrase Decisions

Matthew retains several Semitic/Greek loanwords and technical idioms not yet carried in the baseline or Matthew term registry. This section resolves the transliteration-vs-paraphrase question for each and flags them as new registry candidates for Step 9 registry expansion.

Term	Location(s)	Decision	Rationale
Immanuel	1:23	Transliterate + retain Matthew’s own gloss (“God with us”)	Matthew glosses it himself; do not re-paraphrase away from the text’s own explanation. Cross-reference incarnation.
Raca	5:22	Transliterate + gloss (“a term of contempt, roughly ‘you worthless fool’“)	No modern English insult carries equivalent register; paraphrasing with a contemporary slur would be inappropriate and unstable across time. New registry candidate — Low-Medium risk (obsolescence).
Mammon	6:24	Transliterate + gloss (already in glossary: “wealth/money personified as a rival master”)	Confirmed; carry forward exactly as glossed in 08_core_glossary.md #62.
Hosanna	21:9, 15	Transliterate + gloss (“Save now!” — a plea/acclamation, not a content-free cheer)	Contemporary English has flattened liturgical exclamations like “hallelujah” into decorative interjections; “hosanna” risks the same fate without an explicit gloss restoring its plea-for-salvation content. New registry candidate — Medium risk (obsolescence + trivialization).
Rabbi	23:7-8; 26:25, 49	Transliterate; do not paraphrase as “teacher” alone at 23:7-8	Jesus’ own critique concerns the misuse of this specific title; flattening it to generic “teacher” loses the rhetorical target. Note also that “rabbi” is a currently living, actively used title within contemporary Judaism — a present-tense denominational-sensitivity note distinct from other Matthew loanwords, which are otherwise purely historical. New registry candidate — Low-Medium risk.
Golgotha	27:33	Transliterate; Matthew’s own gloss (“Place of the Skull”) suffices	Low risk; text glosses itself.
”Eli, Eli, lema sabachthani”	27:46	Retain the Aramaic transliteration with Matthew’s own translation alongside (“My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?”)	This is Jesus’ own recorded cry; do not silently modernize or paraphrase away the specific words. Theologically load-bearing for the doctrine of the atonement (background doctrine); treat with the same care as baseline imputed_righteousness/atonement-adjacent terms. New registry candidate — High risk.
Gehenna (rendered “hell”)	5:22, 29-30; 10:28; 18:9; 23:15, 33	Paraphrase as “hell” for readability, but supply the Gehenna/Valley-of-Hinnom historical background at first occurrence	”Hell” carries heavy cartoon-devil-and-pitchfork pop-culture baggage (a mirror-image risk to baseline’s “resurrection as myth” problem) that a bare transliteration (“Gehenna”) would actually avoid but at the cost of comprehensibility. Recommend paraphrase with an explicit corrective note distinguishing Jesus’ sober warning from pop-culture caricature. New registry candidate — High risk (cultural trivialization).
Beelzebul	10:25; 12:24	Transliterate + gloss (“a name for Satan, ‘prince of demons’“)	Obsolescence risk only; no competing modern secular sense to correct. New registry candidate — Low-Medium risk.
Talents (currency, parable of the talents)	25:14-30	Paraphrase-forward: state explicitly this is a large sum of money, not natural ability	See Section 5, ranked ambiguity #10 — this is one of the most severe false-friend risks discovered in this analysis, ironically because the modern English word “talent” (skill/ability) historically derives its meaning FROM this very parable’s influence on the language, which makes the drift especially difficult to see and correct. New registry candidate — High risk (false-friend drift).

General transliteration policy for this curriculum: retain the original loanword/idiom (transliterated or in its traditional English-Bible-translation form) wherever Matthew’s own text supplies or implies a gloss, or where a Semitic/Greek sound-form carries irreducible devotional or historical weight (as with the baseline’s treatment of “Abba” and “seed of David”); paraphrase into plain contemporary English only where the loanword itself would create more confusion than clarity for a general audience (as with “Gehenna” → “hell,” where the corrective is doing more work than the loanword would).

---

Section 5: Ranked List of Highest-Risk Ambiguities

Ranked by combined severity (false-friend drift > denominational contest > obsolescence, per baseline methodology) and centrality to this curriculum’s nine doctrines and core passage.

1. “Cross” / “we all have our cross to bear” (10:38; 16:24) — Critical. The single most entrenched false-friend idiom in the book; a generic-burden misreading is nearly universal in casual English and must never be left uncorrected.
2. Baptism (3:6,11,13-17; 28:19) — Critical. Deep, durable, multi-front denominational contest (mode and effect) at the Great Commission’s climax; consistency across all documents is mandatory per baseline rules.
3. Church / “on this rock” (16:18; 18:17) — Critical. Post-Christian institutional erosion compounded with a centuries-long papal-primacy denominational contest point.
4. Blood of the covenant (26:26-28) — Critical. Compounds baseline covenant’s legal-contract false friend with the deepest Communion-theology divide in English-speaking Christianity.
5. Election / “many are called, but few are chosen” (22:14; 24:22,24,31) — Critical/High. Near-total political-vote capture of “election” in ordinary English; genuine Reformed/Arminian contest at 22:14.
6. Lord, especially at 22:44 (Psalm 110 argument) — Critical. Baseline’s near-total obsolescence-in-lived-authority risk is uniquely acute here because Jesus’ own argument depends on the word still carrying force for the hearer.
7. The “Son of ___” cluster (Son of God / children of God / Son of Man / Son of David) — High, cluster risk. Four distinct high-stakes titles sharing surface vocabulary; conflation risk is structural, not occasional.
8. Judgment / “judge not” (7:1) — High. Direct, active collision with the single most repeated moral idiom in contemporary secular discourse.
9. “Follow” (4:19-22; 8:19,22; 9:9; 16:24; 19:21,27-29) — High, trending toward Critical. Social-media “follow” is now arguably as dominant and as wrong a default sense as “justify” is for justification in the baseline.
10. Talents (25:14-30) — High, newly identified. A uniquely subtle false friend because the modern sense of “talent” (skill/ability) historically grew out of this parable’s own cultural influence, making the drift almost invisible to readers, who will confidently read a parable about stewarding an entrusted sum of money as a parable about “using your natural gifts.”
11. Blessed / “#blessed” (5:3-11, core passage) — High. The core passage’s opening word; social-media usage inverts the sense from a verdict over the afflicted to a boast of visible good fortune.
12. Meek (5:5, core passage) — High. Near-total inversion: contemporary “meek” means weak/timid, the opposite of the biblical sense of controlled strength.
13. Poor in spirit (5:3, core passage) — High. Competing economic-poverty and low-morale misreadings both miss humble, empty-handed dependence on God.
14. Reward (5:12, core passage; 6:1-18; 10:41-42) — High. Consumer loyalty-rewards culture risks a salvation-by-merit misreading precisely where grace must be emphasized.
15. Persecuted (5:10-12, core passage; ch. 10) — High. Pulled simultaneously toward culture-war inflation and comfortable-Western dismissal; both misreadings are currently live.
16. Fulfilled / fulfillment (throughout, esp. 1:22; 5:17) — High. Self-actualization false friend plus live historical-critical suspicion of retrofitted proof-texting.
17. Gehenna / “hell” (5:22,29-30; 10:28; 18:9; 23; new registry candidate) — High. Pop-culture cartoon-devil imagery risks trivializing Jesus’ own sober warnings.
18. Binding and loosing (16:19; 18:18) — High. Occult “binding spell” pop-culture associations are a genuine and growing risk given contemporary media saturation.
19. Kingdom of heaven vs. kingdom of God (throughout) — High. A pure synonym-fence risk: readers may quietly construct two theological categories where Matthew intends one.
20. Great tribulation / “this generation” (24:21, 34) — High. Twin, related ambiguities sitting atop genuine denominational and scholarly disagreement, heavily shaped by popular dispensationalist fiction; must be handled per the Ambiguity Handling rule rather than silently resolved.

---

Summary and Handoff

This gap analysis identifies 8 missing-vocabulary items requiring standing compound phrases (Section 2), 10 crowded semantic neighborhoods requiring explicit fencing statements (Section 3), 9 transliteration/paraphrase decisions including 7 new registry candidates not yet present in bible_term_registry.json (Section 4: Raca, Hosanna, Rabbi, “Eli, Eli, lema sabachthani,” Gehenna/hell, Beelzebul, and Talents), and a ranked list of 20 highest-priority ambiguities for Phase 2 content-generation sequencing (Section 5).

Action items for Step 9 (registry expansion):

• Add the 7 newly identified terms above to bible_term_registry.json with risk tiers as proposed in Section 4.
• Add “Talents” as a standalone High-risk false-friend entry given its unusual severity (Section 5, #10) — this term was not previously catalogued in 08_core_glossary.md and represents a genuine new discovery of this analysis.
• Carry the ten Section 3 “fenced neighborhoods” forward into the Phase 2 AI instruction set as standing cluster-level correction requirements, not merely term-by-term glosses.

---

This document must be loaded alongside 07_semantic_analysis.md, 08_core_glossary.md, and the baseline Language Package artifacts before Phase 1 Step 9 (registry consolidation) and before any Phase 2 content generation for the Matthew curriculum.