Doctrine Analysis
Doctrine Analysis
This Language Package’s doctrine_risk_registry.json tracks 40 doctrines across Romans 1–16, each assigned a risk tier that drives Phase 2 review routing.
Risk tier summary
| Tier | Count | Review routing | Example doctrines |
|---|---|---|---|
| Critical | 2 | Human theologian, every occurrence | Deity of Christ, Sonship of Christ |
| High | 10 | Human theologian | Messianic Promise, Lordship of Christ, Grace, Sainthood, Church as God’s People |
| Medium | 22 | Native speaker review | Divine Calling, Faith, Salvation, Adoption, Sanctification |
| Low | 6 | Automated review only | Gospel, Apostleship, Humanity of Christ, Peace with God, Thanksgiving, Mutual Edification |
Why the risk profile differs from Hindi
Hindi’s Critical/High tier clusters around doctrines with a ready-made syncretistic word from an entirely different religious framework (Hinduism). French’s Critical/High tier clusters instead around doctrines split between two internal Christian traditions (Catholic and Reformed) or narrowed by a strong institutional/clerical default reading — a materially different, generally lower-severity risk, which is reflected in French having only 12 doctrines requiring theologian review compared to Hindi’s 30.
Review routing rationale
Critical and High risk doctrines (12 of 40) require mandatory human theologian review because only a theologically trained reviewer can reliably judge whether a fluent French rendering has quietly resolved a live Catholic/Reformed disagreement in a way inconsistent with this curriculum’s Romans exposition. Native speaker review is sufficient for Medium-risk doctrines, where the concern is secular register drift or institutional-default narrowing rather than doctrinal contradiction between traditions.