Linguistic Gap Analysis

Linguistic Gap Analysis — The Gospel of John

English → Indonesian | Doctrine Vocabulary, Semantic Crowding, and Ambiguity Ranking

Purpose

This analysis identifies where Indonesian vocabulary is missing, crowded, or false-friend-risky relative to the nine doctrines assigned to the John curriculum, and issues concrete strategy recommendations (reuse, extend, fence, transliterate, or paraphrase) ahead of Core Glossary finalization and Phase 2 translation. It extends, and must not contradict, the baseline Romans translation_memory.json / bible_term_registry.json and is fully consistent with 08_core_glossary.md. Where this document and the Core Glossary overlap, this document supplies the reasoning; the glossary supplies the authoritative rendering.

Risk tiers follow the baseline doctrine_risk_registry.json definitions (Critical / High / Medium / Low).

Part A — Doctrine Vocabulary Matrix

#	Doctrine	Available Indonesian Term(s)	Weaknesses of Available Vocabulary	Recommended Strategy
1	Deity and Pre-existence of Christ (the Word)	Firman (λόγος); Allah; Anak Allah; Anak Tunggal; Aku ada/Akulah (ἐγώ εἰμι); naik ke sorga/turun dari sorga	(a) Firman alone does not obviously carry personal, pre-existent, divine-title force to a reader without background — it can be misread as “God’s message/word” rather than a distinct divine Person. (b) Anak Tunggal risks being heard through the same physical-generation lens as Anak Allah. (c) Indonesian tense morphology gives no formal marker distinguishing the absolute “I am” (divine self-designation) from an ordinary present-tense predicate sentence, so the Exodus 3:14 echo is invisible in the bare text.	Reuse Firman (established) but require a first-occurrence (1:1) theologian note establishing personhood + pre-existence + deity together, not sequentially. Retain Anak Tunggal with the same mandatory teaching note as Anak Allah. For ἐγώ εἰμι absolute occurrences, supply a structural teaching note (not a lexical fix, since none exists) at every occurrence rather than attempting to invent a special grammatical marker.
2	The New Birth and Regeneration by the Spirit	dilahirkan kembali; dilahirkan dari air dan Roh; angin/Roh wordplay; daging	(a) dilahirkan kembali collapses John’s deliberate double sense of ἄνωθεν (“again” / “from above”) into only one reading. (b) dilahirkan kembali is dangerously proximate to existing Indonesian religious vocabulary for repeated ritual purification (mandi taubat, repeated wudu) and to popular-culture reincarnation/rebirth notions. (c) The πνεῦμα pun (wind = Spirit, one Greek word) has no Indonesian equivalent; angin and Roh are unrelated words.	Render dilahirkan kembali but mandate an explicit “dari atas” (from above) gloss note at every occurrence (3:3, 7) rather than trying to find a single word capturing both senses. For 3:8, supply the wordplay explicitly as a teaching note rather than attempting a lexical solution — this is a genuine translatability gap, not a term-choice problem.
3	Eternal Life through Faith in Christ	hidup yang kekal; hidup; percaya; binasa	(a) hidup yang kekal is structurally identical to how a fluent Indonesian Muslim reader would describe al-hayat al-akhirah — endless post-judgment life — inviting an automatic assumption that this life is future-only and deeds-conditioned. (b) percaya (verb) and iman (noun) are etymologically unrelated in Indonesian, unlike Arabic-derived Islamic iman/mu’min, so learners may not automatically connect the Gospel’s ~98 uses of percaya to the doctrine of iman already anchored in the Romans material.	Reuse hidup yang kekal but require the 17:3 self-definition (relational knowledge of God, present tense) as the anchor teaching note wherever this term recurs at Critical-risk occurrences (3:15-16, 36; 5:24; 6:47). Add an explicit percaya=iman bridging note at first occurrence (1:12 or 3:15-16).
4	God’s Love for the World	mengasihi; dunia; Juruselamat dunia	(a) dunia is a single word carrying John’s two opposite theological valences (loved by God / hostile to God) with no lexical signal distinguishing which sense is active at a given occurrence. (b) mengasihi is a general-purpose verb for love/affection and, standing alone, does not signal the deliberate, self-giving, initiating divine love that ἀγαπάω denotes here, as opposed to rahmat-style general compassion.	No lexical fix available or needed for dunia (both senses are intentional in the source text); require a standing teaching note explaining the double usage rather than two different target words. For mengasihi, require a first-occurrence (3:16) note establishing deliberate self-giving initiative, distinguishing this from generalized rahmat.
5	Judgment and Belief/Unbelief	penghakiman/menghakimi; sudah dihukum/tidak dihukum; terang; kegelapan; murka Allah	(a) Indonesian everyday and Islamic religious usage strongly defaults judgment-vocabulary to a single deferred future event (yaum al-qiyamah, hari kiamat); rendering κρίσις/κρίνω with ordinary present or past tense forms does not automatically communicate a present-standing verdict. (b) murka Allah risks being read as an impersonal negative outcome/consequence rather than personal divine anger, if not anchored relationally.	Require an explicit present-tense-verdict teaching note at every occurrence of “already condemned / not condemned” (3:18) and at 5:22-29; this is a framing gap, not a lexical one — sudah dihukum is grammatically capable of expressing present standing but needs doctrinal reinforcement so it is not silently re-read as future-only.
6	The Seven “I Am” Statements	Akulah + predicate (roti hidup, terang dunia, pintu, gembala yang baik, kebangkitan dan hidup, jalan dan kebenaran dan hidup, pokok anggur yang benar)	(a) Each predicate noun is individually well-established and unproblematic; the systemic risk is consistency, not any single word — if translators vary “Akulah” vs “Saya adalah” vs “Aku adalah” across the seven occurrences, or vary predicate wording between passages when the same phrase recurs (6:35/48/51; 10:7/9), the unified rhetorical/theological set is fractured. (b) 14:6’s kebenaran triggers the truth/righteousness convergence (see Part B.1 below) at the single highest-stakes I Am statement.	Lock “Akulah” as the fixed formula-opener across all seven (and the absolute occurrences) per baseline “Theological Consistency Rules Across Documents”; treat the seven predicates as a closed, cross-referenced set requiring single-pass consistency review rather than per-chapter independent translation.
7	The Holy Spirit as Counselor	Roh Kudus; Penghibur; menerima Roh Kudus	(a) Penghibur (Comforter) foregrounds the comfort/consolation sense of παράκλητος but underweights its legal-advocate and teaching/reminding senses (14:26; 16:8-11’s prosecutorial imagery). (b) The term sits inside a named, specific Islamic apologetic tradition (Paraclete = a veiled prophecy of Muhammad) that is more targeted and more likely to be encountered by name than the general Roh Kudus/Ruh al-Qudus collision already flagged in Romans baseline.	Retain Penghibur as primary (established Alkitab TB usage) but require the mandatory theologian note distinguishing this from the Muhammad-prophecy apologetic at every occurrence (14:16, 26; 15:26; 16:7), not merely a generic Roh Kudus note. Consider a supplementary gloss (“Penolong yang mendampingi”, “Pembela”) in teaching materials (not the translated text itself) to surface the fuller semantic range.
8	Christ’s Substitutionary Death and Resurrection	menyalibkan; Sudah genap; ditinggikan; Anak Domba Allah; kebangkitan; menyerahkan/mengkhianati; makan daging-Ku/minum darah-Ku	(a) menyalibkan names an event categorically denied by Quran 4:157 — this is a doctrinal-content collision, not a translation-quality problem, and no wording choice resolves it. (b) ditinggikan by itself does not signal the deliberate double sense (crucified AND exalted) that is distinctly Johannine. (c) makan daging-Ku/minum darah-Ku risks a literalized cannibalism/blood-consumption reading, compounded by Quran 5:3’s blood-consumption prohibition.	Require theologian-reviewed notes at every Passion-narrative occurrence of menyalibkan affirming historicity (per baseline Doctrinal Preservation Rule 1); require a double-sense note wherever ditinggikan occurs (3:14; 8:28; 12:32-34); require an explicit figurative-appropriation note at 6:53-56 distinguishing sacramental/typological language from literal consumption.
9	Unity of the Father and the Son	Aku dan Bapa adalah satu; menghormati Sang Anak sama seperti menghormati Bapa; Tuhanku dan Allahku; supaya mereka menjadi satu	(a) satu (“one”) is lexically identical whether describing the Father-Son ontological unity (10:30) or believers’ relational unity (17:11, 21-22); nothing in the word itself signals which sense is meant. (b) Tuhanku dan Allahku applies Allah itself, unqualified, directly to Jesus — the maximum-intensity form of this doctrine, requiring not a different word but the heaviest possible framing support.	Require an explicit distinguishing note wherever satu appears in both senses within reasonable proximity (esp. teaching material covering ch.10 alongside ch.17), clarifying ontological identity vs. relational/derivative unity. Render Thomas’s confession (20:28) with full, unqualified force; do not permit any softened alternative rendering to pass validation.

Part B — Missing Vocabulary vs. Crowded Semantic Neighborhoods

B.1 Crowded Semantic Neighborhoods (one Indonesian word serving multiple, doctrinally distinct source concepts)

B.1.1 — kebenaran: righteousness (δικαιοσύνη) vs. truth (ἀλήθεια) The single highest-density crowding risk in this curriculum. The Romans baseline reserved kebenaran exclusively for forensic righteousness (Critical risk). John barely uses the righteousness sense but uses ἀλήθεια over 25 times as a major, personified, near-titular term for Christ himself and his revelation (1:14, 17; 3:21; 8:32; 14:6; 15:1; 17:17). Using the same Indonesian word for both concepts means a learner moving from Romans to John carries a forensic-standing association into passages that are actually about reality/genuineness/self-revelation. Fencing requirement: every load-bearing ἀλήθεια occurrence, and without exception the I Am statement at 14:6, must carry a note clarifying “truth/reality/genuineness of God’s self-revelation in Christ” is meant, not credited legal standing. This is a standing systemic fence, not a one-time footnote — it must be re-applied at each occurrence per validation rules, since the crowding is structural to the language, not a single translator’s error to be corrected once.

B.1.2 — Roh Kudus / Penghibur: two distinct but overlapping collision surfaces Roh Kudus already collides with Islam’s Ruh al-Qudus (=Gabriel, a created being) per Romans baseline. John adds a second, more specific collision through Penghibur (Paraclete), which some Indonesian Islamic apologetic material argues is a disguised prophecy of Muhammad. These are two separate polemical arguments requiring two separate teaching notes, not one combined note — collapsing them risks a translator or reviewer assuming the existing Roh Kudus note already covers the Paraclete-as-Muhammad claim, when it does not.

B.1.3 — Anak Allah / Anak Manusia / Anak Tunggal proximity Three distinct titles share the head noun Anak (“Son/Child”): Anak Allah (Son of God), Anak Manusia (Son of Man), Anak Tunggal (the only/unique Son). Indonesian readers, especially those newer to the text, risk treating these as interchangeable honorifics rather than three theologically distinct claims (co-equal deity; exalted-but-human Danielic figure; singular unrepeatable relationship to the Father). Fencing requirement: any teaching material introducing more than one of these titles in the same lesson (likely, since John 1, 3, and 5 cluster them) must include an explicit side-by-side distinction note.

B.1.4 — satu (“one”) across Father-Son unity and believer unity See Part A.9 above. Fence explicitly wherever both senses could be read in the same teaching unit (e.g., a lesson spanning ch. 10 and ch. 17).

B.1.5 — dunia (“world”) double valence See Part A.4. Not a translation error to fix but a structural ambiguity to teach; fence with a standing note rather than resolving into two different words (which would itself misrepresent John’s deliberate single-term irony).

B.1.6 — nabi (“prophet”) undershoot Carried over from Romans baseline as High risk. John intensifies this risk by repeatedly narrating characters explicitly misidentifying Jesus as merely “a prophet” (6:14; 9:17) at the exact moments the Gospel’s own claim is categorically greater. This is a “crowded neighborhood” in a narrative-irony sense: the text itself sets a lesser category (nabi, shared with Islam’s closed prophetic line) against its own greater claim (Anak Allah, Firman). Fence by requiring the surrounding narrative contrast, not just the term, be preserved and taught.

B.2 Missing Vocabulary (concepts with no ready Indonesian lexical equivalent, requiring paraphrase or teaching-note supplementation rather than a single-word solution)

ἐγώ εἰμι absolute (Exodus 3:14 echo): No Indonesian tense or grammatical form marks a self-designation as the divine name rather than an ordinary predicate-less sentence. Gap type: structural/grammatical, not lexical. Resolution: mandatory theologian note at every absolute occurrence (8:24, 28, 58; 13:19; 18:5-6, 8), anchored to the narrative confirmation of 8:59 (attempted stoning) as evidence the original hearers heard a deity claim.
πνεῦμα wind/Spirit pun (3:8): No single Indonesian word carries both senses. Gap type: lexical, untranslatable pun. Resolution: explicit teaching note supplying the wordplay’s theological point (the Spirit’s untraceable sovereign freedom), since the pun itself cannot survive translation.
ἄνωθεν double sense (“again”/“from above”) (3:3, 7): Indonesian kembali signals only repetition; dari atas signals only origin/source; no single word holds both simultaneously as ἄνωθεν does. Gap type: lexical. Resolution per Part A.2 above.
ὑψόω double sense (lifted up = crucified + exalted) (3:14; 8:28; 12:32-34): ditinggikan can carry an exaltation sense but does not automatically evoke physical crucifixion; no single Indonesian word holds both as tightly as the Greek. Gap type: lexical. Resolution per Part A.8 above.
A term for “sign” that resists collapsing into “miracle” (σημεῖον vs. generic mujizat): Indonesian tanda is available and adopted (Part C below), but ordinary religious usage in Indonesia (Muslim and Christian alike) defaults readers toward mujizat for any biblical wonder-story; sustained teaching reinforcement is needed to keep tanda’s revelatory, pointer-to-Christ’s-identity sense distinct from a generic wonder-working category.
μονογενής’s precise “one-of-a-kind, unrepeatable” sense: Anak Tunggal (“only/single Child”) captures uniqueness but Indonesian has no equivalent to the Greek’s compound derivation from γένος (kind/type) that makes clear the emphasis is on unique kind of relationship, not birth order or sole biological offspring. Gap type: lexical nuance. Resolution: teaching note alongside Anak Allah’s existing note, specifying “unique in kind,” not “only child in a family sense.”

Part C — Transliteration vs. Paraphrase Decisions

Source Term	Option A: Transliteration	Option B: Descriptive Paraphrase / Established Term	Decision	Rationale
λόγος (Logos)	logos (loanword)	Firman (established Bible term)	B — established term	Logos as a bare loanword would be theologically opaque to most readers and duplicates an already-solved problem; Firman already carries capitalized, personal, divine-title weight in Indonesian Bible tradition.
Παράκλητος (Paraclete)	Parakletos (loanword)	Penghibur (established Alkitab TB term)	B — established term	A bare transliteration would be unintelligible to the target audience and would forfeit the existing, recognized Indonesian rendering; retaining Penghibur also allows direct engagement with existing Indonesian-language apologetic literature that already argues over this exact word.
ἐγώ εἰμι (I Am, absolute and predicated)	Ego eimi (loanword)	Akulah / Aku ada (natural Indonesian first-person copula)	B — natural rendering, with mandatory note	Transliterating the Greek would be unreadable as Indonesian prose and would not itself convey the Exodus 3:14 echo any better than a natural rendering; since no wording choice can supply the echo (see Part B.2), a note is required regardless of which option is chosen, so the natural, readable option is preferred.
μονογενής (monogenēs)	monogenes (loanword)	Anak Tunggal (descriptive paraphrase)	B — descriptive paraphrase	Consistent with baseline’s rejection of the incarnation loanword inkarnasi in favor of a descriptive phrase; a paraphrase keeps the historical/relational content explicit rather than leaving an abstract label to be filled in however the reader expects.
ἀνάστασις — Christ’s specific historical resurrection	anastasis (loanword)	kebangkitan (established baseline term)	B — established term	No new decision needed; reuse baseline exactly per Part A.7 baseline reuse table.
ἀλήθεια (truth/reality)	aletheia (loanword)	kebenaran (established, but crowded — see B.1.1)	B — established term, with mandatory fencing note	A transliteration would solve the crowding problem cleanly but would break “Theological Consistency Rules Across Documents” by introducing a term absent from Romans and unfamiliar to the existing Indonesian Bible-reading tradition. The crowding risk is judged more manageable through disciplined fencing notes than by inventing new vocabulary contrary to established usage.
Ἀμνὸς τοῦ Θεοῦ (Lamb of God)	— (not a candidate for transliteration; proper compound)	Anak Domba Allah	B — established descriptive compound	Standard Indonesian Bible rendering; low ambiguity once distinguished lexically from Anak Allah (different head noun: domba vs. no head noun).
τετέλεστα (It is finished)	—	Sudah genap (established Alkitab TB rendering)	B — established term	Preferred over a more literal “Sudah selesai” (“it is over/done”) because genap carries a fulfillment/completion-of-promise resonance appropriate to redemptive accomplishment, not merely cessation of suffering.
Ἀββά (Abba, cf. Romans 8:15 baseline)	Abba (retained transliteration)	Bapa	A — transliteration retained, per baseline precedent	Not independently occurring as a standalone term in John’s text itself (John does not use the Aramaic Abba), but the baseline precedent of retaining the transliteration alongside the formal title is the template for any future John-adjacent material (e.g., Gethsemane parallels in the Synoptics) that might reintroduce it; noted here for cross-curriculum consistency, no action required within John itself.
Ἁμήν, Ἁμήν (John’s doubled “Truly, truly,” a distinctive Johannine formula)	Amin, Amin (transliteration)	“Sesungguhnya, sesungguhnya” (paraphrase)	A — transliteration, doubled	John’s doubled ἀμήν ἀμήν (over 25 occurrences, including 3:3, 5, 11 in the core passage) is a distinctive authoritative-pronouncement marker. The established Indonesian Bible tradition (Alkitab TB) already transliterates this as “Aku berkata kepadamu, sesungguhnya” in some editions but many render it as “Sesungguhnya” doubled or single; recommend flagging this as a new decision point for Phase 2 consistency (not resolved by Romans baseline, which does not use this Johannine formula) — proposed default: retain the doubling (“Aku berkata kepadamu: sesungguhnya, sesungguhnya…”) to preserve John’s emphatic authority-marking rhetorical pattern rather than flattening to a single “sesungguhnya.”

General principle applied throughout: Consistent with the baseline’s rejection of inkarnasi in favor of a descriptive phrase, this curriculum defaults to established Indonesian Bible tradition and descriptive paraphrase over new theological loanwords, reserving transliteration only for (a) proper names, (b) terms with zero prior Indonesian Bible-tradition rendering where a loanword is genuinely the least-worst option (none identified in John beyond the Amin/Amin formula above), and (c) terms the baseline itself already transliterates (Abba, Amin, Haleluya).

Part D — Ranked List of Highest-Risk Ambiguities

Ranked by combined severity of (i) doctrinal centrality to this curriculum’s nine named doctrines, (ii) likelihood of silent misreading without intervention, and (iii) breadth of occurrence across the book.

[Critical] Anak Allah / Anak Tunggal — Sonship as physical procreation vs. eternal relational Sonship. The single most explosive ambiguity in the curriculum; collides directly with an explicit, repeated Quranic denial (Surah Al-Ikhlas). Occurs at structurally decisive points (1:14, 18, 34, 49; 3:16, 18; 5:25; 10:36; 11:4, 27; 19:7; 20:31) including the Gospel’s own stated purpose verse (20:31).
[Critical] Thomas’s confession, “Tuhanku dan Allahku” (20:28) — unqualified application of Allah itself to Jesus. Maximal-intensity form of tawhid collision; a single verse carrying the entire weight of both the Lordship and Deity doctrines simultaneously, with zero room for softened rendering.
[Critical] Aku dan Bapa adalah satu (10:30) — essential unity vs. mere cooperative agreement. The text’s own narrative confirms the original audience heard a deity claim (attempted stoning, 10:31-33); any rendering that reads as “the Father and I are in agreement” rather than essential ontological unity destroys the doctrine.
[Critical] The absolute ἐγώ εἰμι set (8:24, 28, 58; 13:19; 18:5-6, 8) — invisible in ordinary Indonesian tense morphology. Unlike ambiguities resolvable by word choice, this is a structural gap: nothing in the Indonesian sentence itself signals the Exodus 3:14 echo. Highest risk of silent loss among all ambiguities ranked here, since no reviewer checking only the target text (without the note) would detect the problem.
[Critical] dilahirkan kembali — new birth vs. Islamic ritual re-purification / generic rebirth. Core-passage-central (3:3, 7); the ambiguity is compounded because Indonesian religious vocabulary already has a category (“berulang-ulang mandi/wudu taubat”) into which this could be silently absorbed without any signal of mistranslation to a native-speaker reviewer unfamiliar with the specific collision risk.
[Critical] Penghibur (Paraclete) — Holy Spirit vs. a veiled prophecy of Muhammad. Distinct from, and more specifically targeted than, the general Roh Kudus/Ruh al-Qudus note; this is a named, circulating apologetic argument in Indonesian Islamic literature, not a background risk — the highest risk of active external doctrinal challenge in the curriculum.
[High] kebenaran rendering ἀλήθεια at John 14:6 — truth/reality vs. forensic righteousness. Occurs at the single most exclusivity-charged I Am statement; a reviewer trained on the Romans baseline’s Critical-risk kebenaran=righteousness association could misread this verse as a forensic-standing claim rather than Christ’s self-revelation/exclusivity claim.
[High] menyalibkan (crucify) throughout the Passion narrative — content-collision, not word-choice. Direct contradiction of Quran 4:157; ranked below items 1-6 because, unlike those, no lexical ambiguity exists in Indonesian itself — the risk is entirely in reader reception, requiring consistent apologetic framing rather than translation-choice vigilance at each occurrence.
[High] ditinggikan (lifted up) — crucifixion vs. exaltation, or one sense only. Risk of a translator or reviewer, absent the note, defaulting to only the more comfortable “exalted/honored” sense and losing the cross-reference to physical crucifixion, especially at 3:14 in the core passage itself.
[High] dunia (world) — loved-by-God vs. hostile-to-God senses coexisting. Risk is not mistranslation but unresolved apparent contradiction if the double usage is not explicitly taught; a learner encountering 3:16 and 15:18-19 without guidance may conclude the text is inconsistent rather than deliberately holding both truths.
[High] satu (one) across 10:30 (ontological) and 17:11/21-22 (relational/derivative). Risk of learners concluding believers achieve the same essential unity with God that the Son has, collapsing a carefully maintained theological distinction.
[High] nabi (prophet) — narrative self-correction risk. Characters within John’s own narrative misidentify Jesus as merely a prophet (6:14; 9:17); if the surrounding narrative irony is not preserved in teaching material, learners may absorb the lesser, shared-with-Islam category as John’s own settled conclusion about Jesus’s identity.
[Medium-High] makan daging-Ku / minum darah-Ku (6:53-56) — figurative appropriation vs. literalized reading. Compounded by Quran 5:3’s blood-consumption prohibition; risk of the passage being read (by either the translator or the audience) as endorsing something the target culture finds viscerally objectionable, rather than as covenantal/sacrificial-death imagery.
[Medium] πνεῦμα wind/Spirit wordplay (3:8) — untranslatable pun in the core passage. Ranked lower than the items above because the doctrinal content (the Spirit’s sovereign, untraceable freedom) can be fully supplied by a teaching note even though the wordplay itself cannot survive translation; the risk is one of rhetorical flattening, not doctrinal loss, provided the note is applied.
[Medium] Ἁμήν, Ἁμήν doubling formula — authority-marking emphasis at risk of flattening. Not tied to any single doctrine in this registry but affects the register and perceived authority of numerous statements across the Gospel, including three occurrences in the core passage itself (3:3, 5, 11); ranked lowest among the fifteen because no specific doctrine is destroyed by flattening it, only rhetorical force is diminished.

Summary and Handoff Notes

No doctrine in this curriculum lacks any Indonesian vocabulary whatsoever — every doctrine has at least a workable established or extended term. The genuine gaps identified in Part B.2 are all structural/rhetorical (untranslatable wordplay, invisible tense-echo, double-sense compression), not lexical vacuums, and are all resolvable only through mandatory teaching notes, never through a better word choice.
The dominant risk category in this curriculum is crowding, not absence — five of the nine named doctrines converge on Indonesian words already carrying baseline-assigned senses (kebenaran, Roh Kudus, Anak [Allah/Manusia/Tunggal], satu, dunia). Phase 2 processing must apply the fencing notes specified in Part B.1 as a standing validation requirement, not a one-time correction.
All transliteration-vs-paraphrase decisions favor established Indonesian Bible tradition and descriptive paraphrase over new loanwords, with the sole open decision point being the Ἁμήν, Ἁμήν doubling formula, flagged for Phase 2 Step 16 resolution.
This document’s Part D ranking should directly inform Phase 2 Step 17 review-routing prioritization: items ranked 1–6 require the most senior available theologian review and should not be batch-processed alongside lower-risk segments.

This analysis is the term-strategy authority feeding into 07_semantic_analysis.md and 08_core_glossary.md. It does not itself alter any baseline Romans translation_memory.json entry; all baseline terms are reused exactly per the Hard Rules governing this Language Package.

Library content is free and openly licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 — share and adapt it for non-commercial use, with attribution to tri-bible.ai.