Work with us

Tell us a bit about how you'd like to work with tri-bible.ai.

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

TierCountReview routingExample doctrines
Critical7Human theologian, every occurrenceSalvation, Incarnation, Deity of Christ, Sonship of Christ, Resurrection of Christ, Lordship of Christ, Messianic Promise
High23Human theologianGospel, Divine Calling, Grace, Faith, Sanctification, Universal Scope of the Gospel, Unity of Jews and Gentiles
Medium7Native speaker reviewApostleship, Prayer and Intercession, Spiritual Gifts, Mission to the Nations, Evangelism
Low3Automated review onlyThanksgiving, Mutual Edification, Christian Fellowship

Why Critical doctrines cluster where they do

All seven Critical-risk doctrines share one property distinctive to Gujarati: each has a ready-made, fluent-sounding word drawn from Hindu Vaishnav bhakti tradition AND a separate, equally fluent-sounding word or conceptual gap drawn from Jain tradition. This dual pattern is not a coincidence — Gujarat’s religious landscape genuinely holds these two systems side by side, and a mistranslation would read as correct to either a Hindu-background or Jain-background Gujarati speaker rather than as an obvious error (see Comparative Theology).

Review routing rationale

Critical and High risk doctrines (30 of 40) require mandatory human theologian review because an automated or native-speaker-only check could confirm the Gujarati is fluent without catching that it imports a contradictory theological framework from either tradition. Native speaker review is sufficient for Medium-risk doctrines, where the concern is cultural fit and sensitivity (e.g. colonial connotations of “mission,” or conversion sensitivity in Jain communities) rather than doctrinal contradiction.