Linguistic Gap Analysis
2 Peter Linguistic Gap Analysis (English–Korean)
0. Purpose and Method
This document executes Phase 1 Step 8 for the 2 Peter curriculum: a systematic linguistic gap analysis identifying (a) where Korean’s existing theological vocabulary is adequate but requires doctrinal fencing against a crowded semantic neighborhood, (b) where Korean genuinely lacks a ready term and a compound/paraphrase must be engineered, (c) where transliteration is preferable to translation, and (d) which of this letter’s ambiguities carry the highest translation risk. It extends, and never contradicts, the baseline Romans translation_memory.json, bible_term_registry.json, and doctrine_risk_registry.json, and is fully consistent with the 2 Peter 08_core_glossary.md already produced.
Coverage spans all three chapters of 2 Peter. The core passage (1:16-21) is the theological anchor — grounding the letter’s inspiration-of-Scripture and eyewitness-testimony doctrines — but every chapter has been reviewed for load-bearing vocabulary. Where a chapter section contributes no new terms beyond what is already tabled, that is noted explicitly rather than omitted.
1. Doctrine Vocabulary Matrix
For each of the seven curriculum doctrines: the Korean terms available, their inherent weaknesses/collision risks, and the recommended handling strategy.
1.1 The Reliability and Inspiration of Scripture (2 Peter 1:16-21; 3:2, 15-16)
| Available Korean Terms | Weakness | Recommended Strategy |
|---|---|---|
| 성경 (Scripture) | Risks conflation with 경전 (gyeongjeon), the Confucian/Buddhist term for classical canonical writings transmitted through a scholarly-sagely lineage. | Retain 성경; in exposition explicitly ground its authority in direct divine speech (1:21), not accumulated sage wisdom or scholarly transmission. |
| 성령의 감동하심을 받은 (Spirit “carrying” the writers) | Everyday 감동 means emotional stirring (moved by a film/song); this radically under-translates φέρω’s picture of active, controlling agency. Also borders shamanistic “carried by a spirit” (신들림) language if mishandled. | Use the established compound but ALWAYS accompany with explicit exposition of the fuller sense: the Spirit as personal divine agent superintending conscious human authors, never possessing or overriding their consciousness in a trance-state. Mandatory theologian review every occurrence. |
| 예언 (prophecy) | Overlaps semantically with 점 (fortune-telling) and 사주팔자 예측 (astrological prediction), both live folk practices. | Retain 예언; contrast explicitly with divination in teaching notes at every occurrence. |
| 교묘히 만든 이야기 (cleverly devised myths) vs. 신화 (myth, REJECTED) | 신화 evokes 단군신화 (the Dangun founding legend), risking a reading of the gospel as merely another national-founding-myth genre. | NEVER use 신화. Use the periphrastic 교묘히 만든 이야기 / 꾸며낸 이야기 consistently, reinforcing the eyewitness-verified, non-legendary nature of apostolic testimony. |
| 목격자 (eyewitness), 더 확실한 (more sure) | Low native risk; the comparative force of βεβαιότερον (Scripture’s word as MORE certain than eyewitness experience) can be flattened in loose paraphrase to mere “also reliable.” | Preserve emphatic comparative grammar in Korean (더…확실한, “more certain than X”); flag any translation that softens this to equal-certainty phrasing. |
| 사사로이 풀 것 (private interpretation) | Established KRV phrase, but the popular Korean church reading (mis-applies this to modern readers’ hermeneutics) diverges from the primary grammatical-historical sense (origin of prophecy in the prophet, continued by v.21’s Spirit-agency point). | Teach primary sense (origin, not readers’ interpretive license) as the main point; note the popular application as secondary, not to be presented as the verse’s direct meaning. |
Assessment: Korean is well-resourced here (unlike some lower-literacy target languages in this pipeline) but the central technical term (감동하심) is the single most dangerous “false friend” in the whole letter — a term that looks adequate but silently downgrades an active-agency claim to a passive-emotional one.
1.2 Growing in Christian Virtue (2 Peter 1:3-11)
| Available Korean Terms | Weakness | Recommended Strategy |
|---|---|---|
| 덕 (virtue/ἀρετή) | Collides with Confucian 德, the moral power that legitimizes a ruler and the self-cultivated excellence a sage pursues through disciplined practice. | Fence with explicit teaching: at 1:3, God’s own intrinsic excellence, not an achievement; at 1:5, a Spirit-empowered quality ADDED to faith already given, not a Confucian self-cultivated ruler-virtue or sage-attainment that itself earns further favor. |
| 경건 (godliness/εὐσέβεια) | Can read as generic religious devoutness or ritual correctness shared across Korean religious traditions (cf. baseline’s rejection of 예 for νόμος). | Teach as relational, Spirit-enabled reverence flowing FROM salvation already received, not devout performance that earns it. |
| 지식 (γνῶσις) / 앎 (ἐπίγνωσις) | Korean commonly collapses both Greek senses into one word (지식), obscuring the distinction between growing applied knowledge and foundational, relational, saving knowledge of Christ. | Use 지식 for the growth-sense (1:5, 3:18) and reserve/flag 앎 or a clarifying gloss for the relational-foundational sense (1:2, 3, 8); explicitly teach the dual reference so translators do not treat them as interchangeable. |
| 절제 (self-control), 인내 (perseverance), 형제 우애 (brotherly affection), 사랑 (love) | Comparatively low risk; 인내 must stay distinct from 참을성 (secular tolerance of annoyance) and from μακροθυμία’s distinct term (오래 참으심, God’s patience — see 1.6). 사랑 carries a strong romantic connotation in general usage but is already well-disambiguated in Korean Christian usage. | Retain established renderings; flag 인내/오래참으심 pairing for consistency review so the human-perseverance and divine-patience terms are never interchanged. |
Assessment: The virtue chain (1:5-7) is a concentrated seven-term list; the greatest risk is not any single term in isolation but the cumulative drift toward a Confucian self-cultivation ladder (수신제가 pattern: successive personal moral achievement) rather than a Spirit-enabled organic growth flowing from grace already received (1:3-4).
1.3 False Teachers and Their Judgment (2 Peter 2:1-22)
| Available Korean Terms | Weakness | Recommended Strategy |
|---|---|---|
| 이단 (heresies) | High cultural salience in Korean Protestant discourse — used constantly for controversial new religious movements — but risks being wielded as a bare institutional/tribal label rather than applying the passage’s own substantive test. | Teach 2 Peter 2’s specific criteria (denying the Master who bought them, exploitation for gain, immorality) as the operative definition; do not let 이단 default to generic polemical labeling. |
| 거짓 선지자 / 거짓 교사 | Must be kept distinct from folk fortune-tellers (점쟁이) already addressed under baseline prophet; these figures claim genuine biblical/apostolic authority, a different and more dangerous category. | Retain compound forms explicitly built on 선지자/교사, not generic “deceivers” vocabulary that would lose the false-authority-claim nuance. |
| 지옥 (Tartarus, 2:4) | 지옥 is the general Sino-Korean word for the Buddhist multi-tiered hell (governed by the Ten Kings, 시왕) and the shamanistic underworld (저승, 저승사자 psychopomp). Using it unqualified imports an entire cyclical, karma-governed cosmology foreign to the text. | Mandatory clarifying gloss at every occurrence: a specific, temporary holding place for fallen angels only, awaiting a single future divine judgment — never humanity’s general afterlife destination, never karma-governed, never multi-tiered. Mandatory theologian review. |
| 주님 (for δεσπότης, 2:1) | Standard 주님 doesn’t surface the distinct Greek term (δεσπότης vs κύριος) emphasizing absolute ownership through a costly, one-time redemptive purchase. | Retain 주님 but require a translator note flagging the underlying δεσπότης and its ownership-by-purchase force; guard against collapsing this into 주인님 (baseline-rejected employer/property framing) or any 기복신앙-style repeatable-transaction reading. |
| 음란/방탕 (sensuality), 이성 없는 짐승 (irrational animals), 물 없는 샘 (waterless springs), 발람 (Balaam), 홍수 (Flood) | Low collision risk; standard, stable vocabulary. | Retain as established; no special fencing required. |
| 존귀한 자 (glorious ones, 2:10) vs. 영광 | Same Greek root (δόξα) as “glory” elsewhere, but context here (angelic dignitaries blasphemed by false teachers) requires a DIFFERENT Korean word than the standard 영광 rendering. | Flag explicitly in all translator materials: do not mechanically default δόξα → 영광 in 2:10; use 존귀한 자. |
Assessment: Chapter 2 is vocabulary-dense but mostly low-to-medium risk in Korean specifically (unlike lower-Christian-literacy target languages), with two sharp exceptions: 지옥’s cosmological crowding and 이단’s socio-polemical over-use.
1.4 The Certainty of Christ’s Return (2 Peter 1:16; 3:1-13)
| Available Korean Terms | Weakness | Recommended Strategy |
|---|---|---|
| 강림 (1:16, Transfiguration-preview “coming”) vs. 재림 (ch. 3, Second Coming) | Both translate παρουσία but at two distinct referents (a past preview vs. the future final return); conflating them blurs the Transfiguration’s typological function. | Retain KRV’s own contextual distinction: 강림 only at 1:16; 재림 as the fixed doctrinal term throughout chapter 3 and all cross-document exposition. Never interchange. |
| 조롱하는 자 (scoffers, 3:3) | Low risk, standard. | Retain as established. |
| 샛별 (morning star, 1:19) | Standard literary term for Venus, but exposition could drift toward Korean astrological/fortune-telling associations (점성술) given the star-omen resonance in folk practice. | Teach explicitly: Christ’s own personal appearing, of which prophecy is presently sufficient light — not an astrological omen or portent. |
Assessment: The 강림/재림 distinction is a genuine strength of the existing KRV tradition (a built-in disambiguation unavailable by default in many other target languages in this pipeline) but requires explicit documentation so Phase 2 translators do not “correct” it toward a single uniform rendering.
1.5 The Day of the Lord and Final Judgment (2 Peter 2:4, 9; 3:7, 10-13)
| Available Korean Terms | Weakness | Recommended Strategy |
|---|---|---|
| 주의 날 (Day of the Lord) | No native collision term per se, but exposition must resist softening toward a repeating cycle or an impersonal cosmic turning-point (a risk given Korean traditional cyclical time concepts, e.g. 갑자 sexagenary cycle reckoning, and Buddhist kalpa-cycle thinking more broadly). | Teach as a fixed, future, personal, once-for-all day of moral judgment by the Lord. Mandatory theologian review at every occurrence. |
| 원소/천체 (elements, στοιχεῖα) | Specific, well-grounded Korean risk: 오행 (Five Phases — wood, fire, earth, metal, water), the foundational cosmology behind Korean astrology (사주팔자), traditional medicine (한의학), and geomancy (풍수). Rendering στοιχεῖα loosely risks a reader mapping Peter’s cosmic dissolution onto Five-Phases cosmological cycling. | Clarify as the material building-blocks of the created physical universe, to be dissolved/renewed by God’s decisive act — explicitly NOT the self-sustaining, cyclically-interacting Five Phases. Recommend theologian review. |
| 새 하늘과 새 땅 (new heavens and new earth) | Risk of assimilation to Buddhist 겁 (kalpa) world-age cycle cosmology, in which worlds are repeatedly destroyed and reformed across cosmic ages. | Teach as a single, once-for-all renewed and tangible created order continuous with the present cosmos — not a recurring world-age cycle. |
Assessment: This doctrine cluster carries the sharpest cosmological-collision risk in the letter because Korean traditional cosmology (Five Phases, cyclical time-reckoning, kalpa-cycle Buddhist cosmology) offers three separate, well-established frameworks that could each absorb Peter’s linear, one-time judgment-and-renewal narrative into a cyclical shape.
1.6 Patience of God’s Timing (2 Peter 3:8-9, 15)
| Available Korean Terms | Weakness | Recommended Strategy |
|---|---|---|
| 오래 참으심 (μακροθυμία, God’s patience) | Risk of a fatalistic misreading via 팔자/운명 folk-astrology frameworks — “delay” reinterpreted as an impersonal, pre-fixed timetable rather than deliberate, merciful forbearance by a personal God. | Teach explicitly as personal, purposeful, merciful forbearance making space for repentance (3:9) — never an impersonal fated schedule. |
| 인내 (ὑπομονή, human perseverance) | Must not be confused with 오래 참으심; both involve “waiting,” but one is a divine attribute and the other a human virtue. | Maintain strict lexical separation in all teaching materials; never use 인내 for God’s forbearance or 오래 참으심 for human endurance. |
| 회개 (μετάνοια, repentance) | Risk of collapse into Buddhist 참회 (a repeatable, merit-generating ritual confession practice, e.g. 108 bows) or secular Confucian 반성 (self-reflection without reference to God). | Teach as a decisive, grace-enabled turning of allegiance toward God resulting in salvation — not a repeatable ritual-merit practice or secular self-examination. |
Assessment: This is a compact but high-stakes doctrinal cluster: the entire logic of 3:9 (God is not slow, but patient, so that people can repent) can be quietly re-narrated as karmic/fatalistic time-passage if the 오래참으심/인내/회개 triad is not kept lexically and conceptually distinct.
1.7 Divine Nature and Escaping Corruption (2 Peter 1:3-4; 2:12, 19)
| Available Korean Terms | Weakness | Recommended Strategy |
|---|---|---|
| 신의 성품에 참여하는 자 (partakers of the divine nature) | The single highest syncretism risk in the entire curriculum. Sits atop THREE live Korean frameworks for self-divinization: (1) 불성 (innate Buddha-nature realized through practice), (2) 신선 (Daoist immortal/transcendent status, already forbidden under baseline saints), (3) 신 내림/신들림 (shamanistic spirit-possession). | Mandatory theologian review at every occurrence. Teach explicitly: a real, Spirit-given SHARE in God’s moral character (holiness, incorruptibility, love) received by grace through his promises — never ontological identity with God, never self-cultivated attainment, never a possession-state. |
| 썩어짐/부패 (φθορά, corruption) | Risk of collapse into Buddhist 무상 (musang, impermanence), a metaphysical given transcended through detachment/enlightenment, not a moral-spiritual corruption tied to sin and under judgment. | Teach as moral-spiritual ruin produced by sinful desire, under God’s judgment and escapable by grace — not a universal ontological feature of existence. |
능력 (θεία δύναμις, divine power, extending baseline power_of_god) | Same forbidden-substitution risk as baseline (never 영력, a mudang’s shamanistic spirit-power), now applied to the BROADER scope of “life and godliness” (1:3), not narrowly salvation. | Reuse 능력 exactly; extend the baseline’s forbidden-substitution rule explicitly to this wider scope. |
Assessment: 1:3-4 is arguably the theological center of gravity for syncretism risk in this entire curriculum — more concentrated even than the Day-of-the-Lord cluster — because it makes an explicit ontological claim about believers’ participation in God’s own nature, precisely the territory where Korean religious pluralism offers the most ready (and wrong) alternative frameworks.
2. Missing Vocabulary vs. Crowded Semantic Neighborhoods
2.1 Genuinely Missing Vocabulary (no adequate single Korean term exists; compound/paraphrase engineered)
These concepts have NO ready single-word Korean equivalent and require the compound or periphrastic renderings already engineered in the core glossary:
| Concept | Engineered Korean Rendering | Why No Single Term Exists |
|---|---|---|
| partakers of the divine nature | 신의 성품에 참여하는 자 | No existing Korean theological or folk term captures “real moral participation without ontological identity”; every native candidate (불성, 신선, 신들림) imports a specific competing metaphysic. |
| inspiration / Spirit “carrying” the writers | 성령의 감동하심을 받은 | Korean 감동 alone is too weak (emotional); no existing single verb captures the full φέρω sense of active, controlling, non-possessive divine agency over a conscious human author. |
| equally precious faith | 동일하게 보배로운 믿음 | No idiomatic single term for “faith of identical worth across generations/status,” a concept in tension with Korea’s strongly hierarchical seniority conventions. |
| cleverly devised myths | 교묘히 만든 이야기 / 꾸며낸 이야기 | The single available candidate term (신화) is doctrinally disqualified (see 2.2); no alternative single word exists, requiring a descriptive phrase. |
| δεσπότης (absolute Master, ownership-by-purchase) | 주님 + mandatory translator note | Korean has no distinct lexeme paralleling the κύριος/δεσπότης distinction; the gap must be bridged by paratextual annotation rather than a new target-language word. |
| Tartarus (temporary angelic holding-place) | 지옥 + mandatory clarifying gloss | No untainted single Korean word for a temporary, angels-only, single-judgment-pending holding place exists; every candidate term is already saturated with either Buddhist or shamanistic afterlife content (see 2.2). |
2.2 Crowded Semantic Neighborhoods Requiring Fencing (adequate term exists, but shares space with a live rival framework)
These are cases where Korean DOES have a ready, established term, but that term’s semantic neighborhood is actively populated by a competing religious or philosophical framework, requiring explicit doctrinal fencing in all teaching material:
| Korean Term | Doctrine Position | Competing Occupant of the Semantic Space | Fencing Required |
|---|---|---|---|
| 지옥 | Tartarus (2:4) | Buddhist Ten-Kings multi-tiered hell (시왕); shamanistic underworld (저승) with psychopomp (저승사자) | Mandatory clarifying gloss every occurrence; never leave unqualified |
| 덕 | Virtue (1:3, 5) | Confucian 德 — ruler-legitimating moral power / sage self-cultivation | Explicit “given, not achieved” framing at both occurrences |
| 경건 | Godliness (1:3, 6) | Generic pan-religious ritual devoutness / Confucian 예 propriety | ”Flows from grace already received” framing |
| 원소 | Cosmic elements (3:10, 12) | 오행 Five Phases cosmology (astrology, traditional medicine, feng shui) | “Material building-blocks, not self-sustaining cyclical Phases” framing |
| 새 하늘과 새 땅 | New creation (3:13) | Buddhist 겁 kalpa-cycle world-age renewal | ”Once-for-all, continuous with present cosmos” framing |
| 오래 참으심 | Patience of God (3:9, 15) | 팔자/운명 fatalistic predetermined-timetable folk framework | ”Personal, purposeful, merciful” framing, never fated |
| 회개 | Repentance (3:9) | Buddhist 참회 (ritual merit-confession); secular 반성 (self-reflection) | “Decisive grace-enabled turning,” not repeatable ritual or secular introspection |
| 이단 | Heresies (2:1) | Korean Protestantism’s own everyday polemical usage against rival new religious movements | Apply the passage’s substantive test, not bare institutional labeling |
| 신화 (REJECTED — do not use) | Cleverly devised myths (1:16) | 단군신화 (Dangun founding legend) | Excluded entirely; use periphrasis instead |
| 신의 성품에 참여하는 자 | Divine nature (1:4) | 불성 / 신선 / 신들림 (triple collision — see §1.7) | Highest-priority fencing in the entire curriculum |
| 능력 | Divine power (1:3) | 영력, a mudang’s shamanistic spirit-power | Reaffirm baseline forbidden-substitution at wider scope |
| 강림/재림 | Christ’s coming (1:16 / ch.3) | None doctrinal, but risk of the two terms being collapsed into one by inattentive translators, losing the Transfiguration-preview/Second-Coming distinction | Documentation-level fencing (consistency rule), not doctrinal-collision fencing |
Pattern observed: Nearly every crowded-neighborhood risk in 2 Peter clusters around Korea’s THREE living religious substrates — Confucian ethics (德, 예, 효/제사-adjacent), Buddhist cosmology/soteriology (불성, 무상, 참회, 겁, 지옥), and shamanistic folk practice (영력, 신들림, 저승, 팔자/운명, 사주팔자, 오행). Unlike some target languages in this pipeline facing a single dominant rival framework, Korean theological translation must simultaneously fence against all three, often for the same term (e.g., 지옥 collides with both Buddhist and shamanistic afterlife concepts; 신의 성품 collides with Buddhist, Daoist-adjacent, AND shamanistic frameworks simultaneously).
3. Transliteration vs. Paraphrase Decisions
| Term/Concept | Decision | Rationale |
|---|---|---|
| Jesus, Christ, Peter, Balaam, David-family proper names | Transliterate (established KRV forms: 예수, 그리스도, 베드로, 발람) | Standard practice; no doctrinal content carried by sound alone; consistency with baseline and wider curriculum required. |
| Amen, Hallelujah (not present as distinct terms in 2 Peter’s body text but relevant to liturgical framing in teaching material) | Transliterate (아멘, 할렐루야) | Per baseline convention; established forms carry devotional force untranslatable literally. |
| Tartarus (Τάρταρος) | Paraphrase-with-gloss, NOT transliterate | A transliterated “타르타로스” would be doctrinally inert (no inherited meaning for a Korean reader) while the natural-feeling translation option (지옥) is doctrinally overloaded; the solution is 지옥 + mandatory clarifying gloss rather than either pure transliteration or unqualified translation. |
| παρουσία (parousia) | Paraphrase via two distinct established Korean doctrinal terms (강림, 재림), NOT transliterate | Korean theological tradition has already produced two context-sensitive native renderings carrying real doctrinal precision; a transliteration (“파루시아”) would flatten this built-in distinction and is not the existing Bible-translation convention. |
| ἐπόπται (eyewitnesses) | Paraphrase (목격자), NOT transliterate | No technical mystery-cult resonance exists in Korean requiring preservation; a plain descriptive term communicates the verified-firsthand-testimony sense directly and matches established KRV usage. |
| σεσοφισμένοι μῦθοι (cleverly devised myths) | Paraphrase (교묘히 만든 이야기), explicitly NOT the available single-word translation option (신화) | This is the clearest case in the letter where the “natural,” most literal single-word Korean translation is precisely the one doctrinally disqualified; paraphrase is mandatory, not merely preferred. |
| θείας κοινωνοὶ φύσεως (partakers of divine nature) | Paraphrase (신의 성품에 참여하는 자), NOT a coined neologism or transliteration | A coined neologism would lack any established church usage or Phase-2 translator recognizability; the existing KRV-precedented periphrastic rendering is retained and fenced doctrinally rather than replaced. |
| δεσπότης (Master) | Translate using existing term (주님) + paratextual note, NOT a new coinage or transliteration | Korean has no distinct native lexeme for this nuance; introducing a novel coinage would fragment consistency with the wider curriculum’s Lordship vocabulary, so the existing term is retained with mandatory annotation instead. |
| στοιχεῖα (elements) | Translate (원소/천체), NOT transliterate | A transliteration would be meaningless to readers; the existing Sino-Korean scientific/cosmological vocabulary is retained with explicit doctrinal fencing against 오행 resonance. |
General principle applied: Transliterate proper names and established devotional exclamations only. For technical theological concepts, prefer an existing KRV-precedented Korean rendering (translated or periphrastic) over both (a) inventing new coinages, which would fragment consistency with the wider ten-book curriculum’s established vocabulary, and (b) transliterating Greek terms with no inherited meaning for Korean readers. The one systematic exception is where the natural, most literal Korean translation option is itself doctrinally disqualified (신화 for μῦθοι) — there, paraphrase is mandatory rather than discretionary.
4. Ranked List of This Letter’s Highest-Risk Ambiguities
Ranked by combined severity (doctrinal centrality × likelihood of silent mistranslation) and drawing on the doctrine risk tiers established in the core glossary.
-
θείας κοινωνοὶ φύσεως / 신의 성품에 참여하는 자 (1:4) — Highest-risk term in the curriculum. Triple-framework collision (Buddhist Buddha-nature, Daoist immortal-status, shamanistic spirit-possession) means a translator or teacher operating on cultural autopilot could very plausibly reach for a “natural-sounding” native framing that is precisely the forbidden one. Ambiguity is not in word choice (the rendering is fixed) but in EXPOSITION — the gloss must do the doctrinal work the single phrase cannot carry alone.
-
ὑπὸ Πνεύματος Ἁγίου φερόμενοι / 성령의 감동하심을 받은 (1:21) — Second-highest risk. The established Korean compound is doctrinally correct, but its head component (감동) is a live, everyday word meaning something far weaker (emotional stirring) than the underlying agency claim. Because the phrase looks adequate, this ambiguity is more likely to pass silently through Phase 2 automated review than an obviously foreign-sounding term would.
-
ἡμέρα κυρίου / 주의 날 (3:7, 10, 12) — High risk because Korean’s own coexisting cyclical time concepts (sexagenary cycle reckoning, kalpa-cycle Buddhist cosmology) offer a ready alternative shape (a recurring cosmic turning point) that could quietly replace the text’s insistence on a fixed, one-time, personal day of judgment, especially in devotional paraphrase rather than formal exposition.
-
στοιχεῖα / 원소 (3:10, 12) — High risk specifically because of Korea’s Five-Phases (오행) cosmological substrate, which remains functionally alive in astrology, traditional medicine, and geomancy; a reader could map Peter’s linear cosmic-dissolution narrative onto a cyclical Five-Phases framework without any lexical signal that this has occurred.
-
δικαιοσύνη / 의 in non-forensic-sounding contexts (2:5, 21; 3:13) — Extends the baseline Critical-tier caution into new territory: unlike Romans’ concentrated forensic-justification usage, 2 Peter deploys 의 in contexts (Noah’s proclaimed standard, the “holy commandment,” the character of the new earth) where the surrounding grammar more easily invites a 의리 (loyalty-ethics) misreading than Romans’ more clearly forensic-justification passages did.
-
Τάρταρος / 지옥 (2:4) — High risk of silent cosmological substitution: unqualified use imports the entire Buddhist Ten-Kings/shamanistic-underworld apparatus (multi-tiered, karma-governed, populated by a psychopomp) into a text describing a specific, temporary, angels-only holding place.
-
θεοῦ ἡμῶν καὶ σωτῆρος Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ / 우리 하나님과 구주 예수 그리스도 (1:1) — High risk not of vocabulary substitution but of syntactic/expository drift: Korean punctuation or explanatory paraphrase could easily (even unintentionally) present this as two figures (“our God, and also our Savior Jesus Christ”) rather than preserving the single-referent Granville Sharp force identifying Jesus as God and Savior in one confession.
-
μακροθυμία vs. ὑπομονή / 오래 참으심 vs. 인내 (3:9, 15 vs. 1:6) — Medium-high risk of a subtle category confusion: if these two distinct terms are ever interchanged or blended in exposition, God’s personal, merciful forbearance risks being reframed as an impersonal fated waiting-period matching Korean 팔자/운명 folk-timing concepts.
-
ἀρετή / 덕 (1:3, 5) — Medium-high risk given the concentrated virtue-chain context (1:5-7): the cumulative effect of seven sequential terms in a list format itself invites a Confucian ladder-of-self-cultivation reading unless 1:3-4’s grace-foundation is kept rhetorically prior in all teaching material.
-
δόξαι / 존귀한 자 vs. 영광 (2:10) — Medium risk, but specifically a MECHANICAL-ERROR risk rather than a conceptual-collision risk: because δόξα is elsewhere reliably rendered 영광, a translator working segment-by-segment without full-context awareness could default to 영광 here and inadvertently apply divine-glory vocabulary to created angelic beings, which the passage’s exposition (contrasting the false teachers’ blasphemy) specifically depends on NOT doing.
-
ἰδίας ἐπιλύσεως / 사사로이 풀 것 (1:20) — Medium risk of a durable, widespread misapplication already present in Korean church popular teaching (treating this as a rule about modern readers’ private Bible interpretation) rather than the primary grammatical-historical point about the prophecy’s divine, not human, origin.
-
γνῶσις vs. ἐπίγνωσις / 지식 vs. 앎 (throughout ch. 1, 3:18) — Medium risk of the two Greek senses collapsing into Korean’s single common word 지식, obscuring the letter’s distinction between ongoing growth-knowledge and foundational, relational, saving knowledge already presupposed.
5. Full-Book Coverage Confirmation
| Chapter | New Terms / Doctrines Contributed | Status |
|---|---|---|
| 2 Peter 1 | Core passage (1:16-21); virtue chain (1:3-11); Granville Sharp construction (1:1); equally precious faith; calling/election; eternal kingdom; Transfiguration vocabulary (강림, 목격자, 존귀, 지극히 큰 영광); inspiration doctrine (1:19-21) | Reviewed — primary contributor of new vocabulary |
| 2 Peter 2 | False teachers, heresies, Tartarus, δεσπότης, sensuality, Flood/Balaam typology, δόξαι/존귀한 자 exception, freedom/corruption irony | Reviewed — second-largest contributor |
| 2 Peter 3 | Day of the Lord, elements/στοιχεῖα, new heavens and new earth, patience of God, repentance, scoffers, παρουσία as 재림, closing grace/knowledge exhortation (3:18) | Reviewed — third major contributor; also carries the letter’s closing benediction requiring consistency with 1:2’s greeting-formula peace/grace pairing |
All three chapters have been reviewed in full; no chapter is silently omitted. This document, together with 08_core_glossary.md, provides complete term and risk coverage for 2 Peter 1:1 through 3:18.
This document extends the baseline Romans Language Package and must be read alongside translation_memory.json (to be incremented to version 2), bible_term_registry.json, and doctrine_risk_registry.json for the 2 Peter curriculum.