Philippians Linguistic Gap Analysis (Korean)

1. Purpose and Method

This analysis answers four questions for every doctrine in the Philippians curriculum:

1. What Korean vocabulary already exists (from the Romans baseline or general Korean Christian usage) to carry this doctrine?
2. Where does that vocabulary fall short — either because no adequate term exists (a gap), or because the available term sits inside a crowded semantic neighborhood shared with Korean shamanism (무속신앙), Confucian social ethics, Buddhist soteriology, or modern secular achievement culture?
3. For each load-bearing term, should Phase 2 transliterate, coin a paraphrase, or reuse an established compound — and why?
4. Across the whole letter, which specific verse-level ambiguities carry the highest risk of doctrinal distortion, ranked for review-routing priority?

Method: each of the eight assigned curriculum doctrines was cross-checked against (a) the Romans baseline translation_memory.json/doctrine_risk_registry.json for reusable terms and already-documented collision patterns, and (b) the Philippians-specific 08_core_glossary.md and bible_term_registry.json extension for new load-bearing vocabulary. Korea’s religious landscape is treated as genuinely plural and live — shamanism (무속신앙), Buddhism, Confucian social ethics, and a highly Christianized but achievement-driven modern culture all continue to supply competing frames a lay Korean reader may unconsciously import.

---

2. Doctrine Vocabulary Matrix

Doctrine	Available Korean Terms	Weaknesses / Gaps	Recommended Strategy
The Incarnation and Self-Emptying of Christ (Kenosis)	성육신 (incarnation, REUSED Critical); 자기 비움/자기를 비우다 (kenosis, NEW Critical); 본체 (form of God, NEW Critical); 형체 (form of servant, NEW Critical); 취할 것 (harpagmos, NEW Critical); 하나님과 동등됨 (equality with God, NEW Critical); 지극히 높이다 (highly exalted, NEW Critical); 시인하다 (confess, NEW Critical)	성육신 is solid and established, but the kenosis half of the doctrine has no equally settled Korean theological compound — the available candidate word 비움 belongs to Korean Buddhism’s 공(空)/무아(無我) vocabulary and to the widely read monk Beopjeong’s popular 무소유 spirituality. There is no existing Christian-specific coinage in general Korean church usage that cleanly separates “Christ’s self-emptying” from “Buddhist self-dissolution.”	Retain the paraphrase 자기를 비우다 (not a single-word coinage, not a transliteration) precisely because its two morphemes (자기, “self”; 비우다, “to empty”) allow a teaching note to invert the Buddhist reading explicitly: Christ empties himself of the display of privilege, not of selfhood, and does so by adding a human nature, not by dissolving toward non-being. Mandatory paired teaching note at every occurrence (2:7). Human theologian review required for every occurrence, per 08’s Critical rating.
Joy in Suffering and Imprisonment	기쁨/기뻐하다 (joy, NEW High); 고난/환난 (suffering, NEW High); 매임/갇힘 (bonds, NEW Medium); 은혜를 주신 것 (suffering as grace-gift, NEW Critical); 사는 것이 그리스도니 죽는 것도 유익함이라 (to live is Christ, NEW High)	Korean has an unusually rich vocabulary for suffering generally, including the culturally distinctive concept of 한(han) — a long-accumulated, often unresolved communal/personal sorrow. 한 is not a doctrinal risk term (it is not a false doctrine to reject) but a gap: there is no existing Christian technical vocabulary distinguishing gospel-joy-amid-suffering from either (a) 한’s accumulation-and-endurance pattern (which has no built-in resolution or transformation) or (b) folk-religious readings of suffering as 액운 (fate-derived misfortune) or 벌 (divine/karmic punishment).	Use established 고난/환난 and 기쁨/기뻐하다 exactly, but supplement teaching material (not the translated text itself) with an explicit contrastive note: gospel joy does not deny or merely endure suffering as 한 does, nor treat it as 액운/벌; it actively reframes suffering as itself grace-given (1:29, 은혜를 주신 것) with a resolution (Christ, gain in death, 1:21). This is a teaching-layer gap, not a lexical one — no new term is needed, but a doctrinal footnote is mandatory at 1:29-30.
Unity and Humility in the Church	겸손 (humility, NEW High); 같은 마음을 가지다/마음을 품다 (phroneō motif, NEW High); 한마음 (one in spirit, NEW Medium); 다툼 (selfish ambition, NEW Medium); 허영 (vain conceit, NEW Medium); 관용 (gentleness, NEW Medium); 교회 (church, REUSED Medium); 성령 (Holy Spirit, REUSED Critical)	겸손 is fully available and idiomatic, but it sits inside a crowded neighborhood: Korean Confucian social ethics has a robust, everyday sense of 겸손 as a subordinate’s self-deprecating deference toward a superior (a junior bowing to a senior, an employee to a boss). Philippians 2:3-8 describes the reverse vector — a superior (Christ, equal with God) voluntarily lowering himself for those with no claim on him. Without correction, Korean readers may default to the hierarchical-deference reading and miss the status-reversal force of the passage.	Retain 겸손 (no better single word exists and the term is too embedded to replace), but require a translator’s/teacher’s note at 2:3-8 clarifying the direction of the reversal: not “junior defers to senior” but “the superior lowers himself for the lesser.” This distinguishes doctrine from cultural default without requiring new vocabulary. φρονέω-family terms (마음을 품다) must render identically across all seven occurrences (1:7; 2:2; 2:5; 3:15,19; 4:2,10) so the “mind of Christ” (2:5) reads as the climax of one running motif, not an isolated command — a consistency gap, not a translation gap.
Righteousness by Faith versus the Law	의 (righteousness, REUSED Critical); 율법 (law, REUSED High); 믿음 (faith, REUSED High); 의로 여기심 (imputed righteousness, REUSED Critical); 할례 (circumcision, NEW High); 손 할례당 (mutilation wordplay, NEW Medium); 육체를 신뢰하다 (confidence in flesh, NEW High); 해로 여김/배설물 (loss/rubbish, NEW High)	The Romans baseline already fences 의 against 의리 (loyalty-ethics), but Philippians 3:6,9 is where this fencing becomes load-bearing rather than background: Paul explicitly opposes “a righteousness of my own from the law” (의리-adjacent, credential-based) to “the righteousness from God through faith” (의로 여기심). The risk is not a missing term but a doctrinal-emphasis gap — 3:9’s antithesis is the clearest place in the whole two-book curriculum (Romans + Philippians) to make the 의/의리 distinction concrete and must not be treated as merely a repeat of Romans vocabulary.	No new terms required; reuse 의, 율법, 믿음, 의로 여기심 exactly per the Romans TM. Require a dedicated translator’s note at 3:9 (not merely a generic flag) walking through Paul’s own two-part antithesis (law-righteousness rejected / faith-righteousness received) so the abstract Romans-level distinction becomes concretely visible in this autobiographical passage. σκύβαλα (배설물) must retain its crude, established force — do not soften.
Contentment in All Circumstances	자족 (autarkeia, NEW Critical); 비결 (learned the secret, NEW Critical); 내게 능력 주시는 자 (him who strengthens me, NEW Critical); 평강 (peace of God, NEW/nuance High)	This is the letter’s single most crowded neighborhood cluster in the entire curriculum. Three separate popular Korean frames converge on 4:11-13: (1) Buddhist-popularized 무소유 (“non-possession,” self-disciplined detachment from desire) as a contentment path; (2) the ubiquitous secular self-help register of 비결 (“the secret/formula for success,” e.g. “성공의 비결,” “다이어트의 비결”); and (3) 4:13 as Korea’s most commonly decontextualized “success verse,” printed on merchandise and quoted before exams, sports, and business ventures. None of the available Korean words are wrong per se — 자족, 비결, and 능력 are all standard, established renderings — but together, without fencing, they form a near-perfect verbal match for a self-help/prosperity reading Paul is not making.	Retain all three established renderings (they are correct), but require: (a) mandatory footnoting at 4:11-13 anchoring “the secret” and “him who strengthens me” to the actual content of vv.11-12 (contentment amid both want and plenty — a learned posture, not a technique for guaranteed outcomes); (b) explicit contrast statement against 무소유 (Paul’s contentment is Christ-dependent, not self-disciplined detachment) and against decontextualized “success verse” usage; (c) Human theologian review mandatory for every occurrence of all three terms, per 08’s Critical rating — the highest concentration of Critical terms per verse-count in the letter.
Citizenship in Heaven	시민권 (citizenship, NEW High); 구주 (savior, NEW Critical); 낮은 몸/영광의 몸 (body of humiliation/glory, NEW Medium-High); 합당하게 생활하라 (conduct worthily, citizenship verb, NEW High)	Two distinct gaps stack here. First, a narrowing gap: modern Korean 시민권 primarily denotes legal/passport citizenship (a bureaucratic-administrative concept), which under-translates πολίτευμα’s richer sense of present community-identity and homeland-belonging. Second, a collision gap: Korea’s strong ethnic-nationalist self-concept of 단일민족 (“a single, homogeneous ethnic nation,” already flagged High risk in the Romans baseline) risks either (a) heavenly citizenship being read as simply one more competing national-identity claim layered on top of Korean identity, or (b) the doctrine being flattened into a diplomatic-sounding dual-citizenship metaphor that loses its relativizing force over ordinary national belonging.	Retain 시민권 (no better established alternative exists and coining a new word risks obscurity), but require explicit teaching-note fencing at 3:20 distinguishing this from mere legal-status language and from a “second passport” reading — heavenly citizenship is the believer’s primary, defining identity, not an additional administrative status alongside Korean nationality. Flag 1:27’s πολιτεύεσθε inclusio (rendered generically as 합당하게 생활하라 in established KRV, losing the citizen-word link to 3:20) with a translator’s note so teachers can draw the connection even though the base text vocabulary differs.
Partnership in the Gospel	교제 (fellowship, REUSED base Low, escalated to High in Philippians); 복음의 동참 (NEW High); 동역자 (co-worker, NEW Medium); 주고받는 것 (giving and receiving, NEW High); 향기로운 제물/받으실 만한 희생 제사 (fragrant sacrifice, NEW High); 전제와 같이 부어지다 (drink offering, NEW High)	Multiple financial/sacrificial-giving terms cluster in ch. 4, and each independently touches Korean churches’ well-documented “seed-faith”/prosperity-offering culture — giving calibrated to expect proportional material blessing in return, the same 기복신앙 (fortune-seeking faith) pattern already flagged Critical for “grace” in the Romans baseline. This is not a single-term problem but a cumulative framing gap: four separate vocabulary items (동참, 주고받는 것, 향기로운 제물, 전제) all touch giving/offering, and if even one is mistaught transactionally, the others tend to be reinterpreted the same way by association.	Reuse 교제 for cross-document consistency (per the Romans TM); supplement, never replace, with 동참/동역 in teaching contexts to carry Philippians’ stronger active-participation sense. Require one consolidated teaching note covering all four giving/offering terms together (rather than four separate isolated notes) making explicit that the Philippians’ gift is covenant-partnership love and worship-expression, not a blessing-purchasing exchange — this guards against the cumulative-association risk more effectively than fencing each term individually. The drink-offering image (2:17) additionally requires explicit distinction from the Korean ancestor-rite libation (제사, jesa) already flagged Critical under “Father” in the Romans baseline.
Pressing on toward the Goal in Christ	좇다/따르다 (press on, NEW High); 상/푯대 (prize/goal, NEW Medium); 온전히 이루다 (perfected, NEW High); 부르심 (calling, REUSED High); 위에서 부르신 부름 (upward call, NEW High)	Korea’s intensely competitive, achievement-oriented culture (already flagged under “glory”/출세 and “election” in the Romans baseline) supplies a ready-made and doctrinally inverted frame for this entire doctrine: effortful, merit-based striving toward a self-earned outcome. Separately, Korean religious vocabulary already has established self-cultivation-attainment terms for “completion/perfection” (도통, “mastering the Way”; 성불, “attaining Buddhahood”) that could silently substitute for Paul’s explicit denial of present self-attained perfection (3:12).	Retain established terms 좇다/따르다, 상/푯대, 온전히 이루다 exactly, but require: (a) a teaching note at 3:12b anchoring the pursuit in grace — Paul presses on because Christ has already laid hold of him, reversing the achievement-culture default of self-initiated striving; (b) explicit denial-of-attainment framing at 3:12a distinguishing 온전히 이루다 from 도통/성불-style self-mastery. No new coinage needed; this is a framing gap, addressed through mandatory contextual notes rather than lexical substitution.

---

3. Missing Vocabulary vs. Crowded Semantic Neighborhoods

3.1 Genuine Missing-Vocabulary Gaps (no adequate existing Korean term)

These are cases where Korean simply lacks a single established word or compound that captures the biblical concept without either coining a new phrase or accepting an imperfect existing one:

Concept	Gap Description	Resolution
κενόω (kenosis) as a positive, addition-based self-limitation	No Korean word exists for “voluntarily declining to exercise a privilege one still possesses” distinct from “emptying oneself of being.”	Paraphrase 자기를 비우다 retained, with mandatory contrastive teaching note (see §2).
ἁρπαγμός (a status not to be exploited)	No single Korean noun captures “a thing already possessed but not seized/exploited for advantage” — most candidate words import either the “seizing” or “obtaining” sense but not both together with the “already possessed” nuance.	Paraphrase 취할 것 (“a thing to be taken/grasped”) with fencing note clarifying Christ was not lacking deity.
φρονέω as thought-plus-disposition	No single Korean verb captures the blend of cognitive orientation and settled attitude that runs through the letter’s unity motif.	Paraphrase 마음을 품다/같은 마음을 가지다 retained; consistency across all 7 occurrences prioritized over lexical elegance.
αὐτάρκεια as a specifically Christ-dependent (not self-generated) contentment	No existing Korean Christian term distinguishes “learned Christ-dependent contentment” from either the Stoic self-sufficiency ideal or Buddhist-flavored non-attachment; 자족 alone does not carry this distinction.	Retain 자족, add mandatory contrastive footnote (see §2) rather than coin an unfamiliar new compound that would alienate readers.

3.2 Crowded Semantic Neighborhoods Requiring Fencing

These are cases where adequate, even excellent, existing Korean vocabulary is available — the risk is that the same word already has a strong competing home in another live tradition, requiring active textual/teaching “fencing” rather than vocabulary substitution:

Korean Term	Competing Neighborhood	Doctrine at Risk	Fencing Strategy
비움/자기 비움	Buddhist 공(空)/무아(無我); Beopjeong’s popular 무소유 spirituality	Incarnation/Kenosis	Mandatory contrast note at every 2:7 occurrence; never used unqualified.
능력	Shamanistic 영력 (mudang’s spirit-power); modern Korean charismatic “power” ministry culture; decontextualized “success verse” quoting of 4:13	Power of God for Salvation; Contentment	Always anchor to 4:11-13’s actual content (contentment amid both want and plenty) or to 3:10’s fellowship-of-sufferings pairing; never excerpted as a stand-alone slogan.
비결	Modern secular self-help/success-formula register (“성공의 비결”)	Contentment	Mandatory footnote at 4:12 tying “the secret” to the hard-won, circumstance-tested posture of vv.11-12, not a transferable technique.
겸손	Confucian hierarchical deference (subordinate-to-superior politeness)	Unity and Humility	Teaching note clarifying the reversed vector: superior lowering himself for the lesser (2:3-8).
시민권	Legal/administrative citizenship; 단일민족 ethnic-nationalist self-concept	Citizenship in Heaven	Teaching note distinguishing primary spiritual identity from legal/national status; not a “second passport.”
전제 (drink offering)	제사 (jesa) ancestor-rite libation gesture	Joy in Suffering / self-giving ministry	Explicit note: Paul’s self-offering is to God alone through gospel ministry, never toward or on behalf of the deceased.
주고받는 것 / 향기로운 제물	기복신앙 seed-faith/prosperity-offering giving culture	Partnership in the Gospel	Consolidated teaching note (see §2) covering all giving/offering vocabulary together.
좇다/따르다, 온전히 이루다	Achievement/competition culture (출세); self-cultivation attainment (도통, 성불)	Pressing on toward the Goal	Grace-grounding note at 3:12b; explicit not-yet-complete framing at 3:12a.
의	Confucian/popular 의리 (loyalty-ethics, gangster-film honor code)	Righteousness by Faith vs. Law	Dedicated antithesis note at 3:9 (see §2), sharper than the Romans-level generic flag.
부르심	팔자/사주팔자 (birth-chart fate, folk astrology)	Pressing on toward the Goal (3:14’s “upward call”)	Retain Romans TM fencing; reaffirm personal-summons sense at 3:14.

3.3 Net Assessment

Philippians introduces comparatively few pure missing-vocabulary gaps (§3.1) relative to the Romans baseline — Korean’s mature, century-old Protestant Bible tradition already supplies workable renderings for nearly every Philippians-specific term. The dominant risk pattern in this letter is instead neighborhood crowding (§3.2): correct, established words that nonetheless sit inside live, culturally powerful alternative frameworks (shamanistic power-seeking, Buddhist non-attachment/emptying, Confucian hierarchical deference, modern success-formula rhetoric, and prosperity-giving culture). This shifts the Phase 2 translation burden away from lexical invention and toward mandatory contextual fencing: footnotes, paired-verse teaching requirements, and human-review routing bear more of the doctrinal-protection weight in Philippians than new coinages do.

---

4. Transliteration vs. Paraphrase Decisions

Term	Decision	Rationale
κενόω (kenosis)	Paraphrase (자기를 비우다), not transliteration (케노시스)	A Greek loanword transliteration would be theologically opaque to a lay curriculum audience and would forfeit the very self/emptying morpheme structure that makes the contrastive teaching note (vs. Buddhist self-dissolution) legible in Korean. Transliteration reserved only as an optional parenthetical technical gloss “(κένωσις, 케노시스)” for seminary-level teacher notes, never in the base translated text.
ἁρπαγμός (harpagmos)	Paraphrase (취할 것)	No established Korean transliteration tradition exists for this term (unlike, e.g., 아멘/할렐루야); a loanword would be unintelligible. Paraphrase carries the doctrinal weight instead, fenced by teaching note.
μορφή (morphē, “form”)	Established compound, not transliteration (본체 / 형체)	Korean theological tradition already distinguishes these two senses with existing compounds; introducing a transliterated “모르페” would abandon a working, doctrinally precise existing solution for no gain.
αὐτάρκεια (autarkeia)	Paraphrase (자족), retaining existing KRV term	Well-established in Korean Bible tradition; transliteration would be both unnecessary and alienating. Risk is managed through footnoting, not through lexical choice.
μεμύημαι (memyēmai, “I have learned the secret,” from mystery-initiation vocabulary)	Paraphrase using existing KRV term (비결), not a technical transliteration of the mystery-religion background	The Greek’s mystery-cult background is itself a teaching point best explained in a footnote rather than imported as a loanword; 비결 is the term to fence, not replace.
Abba (Aramaic, Romans 8:15; referenced conceptually near Philippians’ father/sonship theme)	Transliteration retained (아빠, per Romans TM)	Already established in the Romans baseline as an unusually well-fitting near-cognate; no change needed for Philippians.
Proper names: Euodia, Syntyche, Epaphroditus, Clement, Caesar’s household	Transliteration (유오디아, 순두게, 에바브로디도, 글레멘드, 가이사의 집)	Standard KRV proper-name transliteration practice; these carry no doctrinal risk and should follow established Bible-translation-tradition forms exactly, consistent with the Cross-Reference Preservation Rules in 12_ai_translation_requirements.md.
δοῦλος (doulos, “slave/servant”) applied to Paul (1:1) and Christ (2:7)	Established compound, not transliteration (종)	종 is a real, weighty Korean word (recalling the abolished pre-modern bondservant class, 노비) already used in established Christian usage for self-abasing servanthood; must be retained (not softened to a milder “helper/minister” word) precisely to preserve the deliberate literary echo between Paul’s self-designation and Christ’s kenosis in 2:7.
πολίτευμα (citizenship)	Established term, not a new coinage (시민권)	Coining an unfamiliar new compound to avoid the legal-citizenship narrowing risk would create a worse problem (reader confusion) than fencing the existing, recognizable term with a teaching note.
κοινωνία (fellowship/partnership)	Reuse of established base term, supplemented by paraphrase in teaching layer (교제 retained in translated text; 동참/동역 used only in surrounding teaching material)	Preserves the Romans TM’s cross-document consistency rule (same Korean term for the same Greek term across all curricula) while still allowing Philippians’ stronger participatory sense to be taught without altering the base rendering itself.

General principle governing all decisions above: transliteration is reserved exclusively for (a) established proper names, and (b) theological loanwords already fixed in Korean Bible tradition (아멘, 할렐루야). Every doctrinally load-bearing common-noun or verb-phrase concept in Philippians is handled through paraphrase or an existing compound, with doctrinal protection achieved through mandatory footnoting/teaching notes rather than through the lexical choice alone. This mirrors the Romans baseline’s own pattern (e.g., 성육신, 의로 여기심 are paraphrase-compounds, not transliterations).

---

5. Ranked List of Highest-Risk Ambiguities in Philippians

Ranked by combined severity (doctrinal centrality × real-world collision likelihood, per the Romans baseline’s Critical/High/Medium/Low framework), highest first. All Critical-tier entries require mandatory human theologian review per occurrence.

1. 내게 능력 주시는 자 / 능력 (Philippians 4:13) — Critical. The single highest real-world collision risk in the letter: routinely excerpted as a talismanic success-guarantee slogan (exams, sports, business), directly continuous with the Romans baseline’s 영력/능력 shamanistic-power warning. Must always be anchored to 4:11-12’s contentment-amid-want-and-plenty context.
2. 비결 (Philippians 4:12) — Critical. Modern Korean’s extremely common self-help register (“성공의 비결”) makes this the most idiomatically natural-sounding but doctrinally riskiest word choice in the chapter; compounds directly with risk #1.
3. 자기를 비우다 / kenosis (Philippians 2:7) — Critical. Direct lexical overlap with Buddhist 공/무아 vocabulary and Beopjeong’s popular 무소유 spirituality; the doctrinal center of the core passage (2:1-11) is at stake.
4. 자족 / autarkeia (Philippians 4:11) — Critical. Resonates with both the Stoic self-sufficiency ideal Paul is subverting and Korean Buddhist-popularized non-possession spirituality; without fencing, Paul’s Christ-dependence claim (4:13) can be silently dropped.
5. 취할 것 / harpagmos and 하나님과 동등됨 / equality with God (Philippians 2:6) — Critical. Any softening here (“something to attain,” “similar to God”) directly compromises the deity_of_christ doctrine at its single clearest statement in this letter.
6. 너희 구원을 이루라 (Philippians 2:12), decoupled from 2:13 — Critical. Superficially synergistic phrasing; without mandatory pairing with “God who works in you,” risks a self-cultivation-attainment misreading parallel to the Romans baseline’s forbidden justification substitutions.
7. 은혜를 주신 것 / suffering as grace-gift (Philippians 1:29) — Critical/High. Counter-intuitive doctrinal claim (suffering itself is grace) easily overridden by the folk-religious default reading of suffering as 액운 (misfortune) or 벌 (punishment).
8. 의 in the law/faith antithesis (Philippians 3:6, 9) — Critical. The 의/의리 collision inherited from Romans becomes acutely load-bearing here, since Paul’s own autobiographical contrast makes the distinction concrete rather than abstract; a missed distinction here undermines the letter’s central soteriological argument.
9. 전제와 같이 부어지다 / drink offering (Philippians 2:17) — High. Visual/gestural overlap with the jesa ancestor-rite libation, a documented historically sensitive collision point already Critical under “Father” in the Romans baseline.
10. 겸손 (Philippians 2:3) — High. Confucian hierarchical-deference default risks inverting the direction of the status-reversal Paul describes (superior lowering himself, not subordinate deferring upward).
11. 시민권 (Philippians 3:20) — High. Dual risk of legal-citizenship narrowing and unintended interaction with Korea’s 단일민족 ethnic-nationalist self-concept.
12. 주고받는 것 / 향기로운 제물 (Philippians 4:15, 18) — High. Cumulative-association risk with Korean churches’ seed-faith/prosperity-offering culture; risk compounds across multiple giving-vocabulary terms in the same chapter.
13. 좇다/따르다 and 온전히 이루다 (Philippians 3:12, 14) — High. Korea’s achievement/competition culture supplies a ready merit-based misreading; self-cultivation-attainment vocabulary (도통/성불) is a live substitution risk if fencing notes are omitted.
14. 교제 escalation to a partnership/participatory sense (Philippians 1:5; 2:1; 3:10) — High (escalated from the Romans baseline’s Low/generic rating). Risk is under-translation (reading only the relational-fellowship sense) rather than a forbidden-term collision, but still requires deliberate teaching-layer supplementation.
15. 평강 vs. 화평 (Philippians 1:2; 4:7, 9) — High. Risk of the two established KRV peace-terms being treated as freely interchangeable, collapsing the doctrinal (peace-with-God) and experiential (heart-guarding peace) senses the Korean tradition otherwise keeps usefully distinct.

Coverage note: all four chapters of Philippians were reviewed for this analysis. No chapter was found to contribute zero new vocabulary or ambiguity; chapters 1, 2, 3, and 4 each surface at least one item in the ranked list above (ch.1: #7, #9, #14, #15; ch.2: #3, #4 [context-setting], #5, #6, #9, #10; ch.3: #8, #11, #13; ch.4: #1, #2, #4, #12, #15).