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 | 5 | Human theologian, every occurrence | Grace, Salvation, Deity of Christ, Lordship of Christ, Power of God for Salvation |
| High | 20 | Human theologian | Divine Calling, Faith, Adoption, Sanctification, Spiritual Gifts, Providence, Universal Scope of the Gospel |
| Medium | 10 | Native speaker review | Gospel, Messianic Promise, Peace with God, Mission to the Nations, Evangelism |
| Low | 5 | Automated review only | Apostleship, Thanksgiving, Mutual Edification, Christian Fellowship, Kingdom Mission |
Why Critical doctrines cluster where they do
Korean’s five Critical-risk doctrines are the narrowest and most concentrated set in this batch of four languages, and they cluster specifically around the shamanism-and-spirit-power axis: Grace and Power of God for Salvation are Critical because of Korean Christianity’s own well-documented internal critique of 기복신앙 (“fortune-seeking faith”), a shamanistically-patterned transactional approach to blessing; Deity of Christ and Lordship of Christ are Critical for the same reasons they are everywhere in this pipeline (guarding against a merely-powerful-spirit reading); and Salvation is Critical against Buddhist liberation (해탈). Notably, several doctrines that are Critical or High elsewhere in this pipeline — Incarnation, Sonship of Christ, Resurrection, Kingdom Mission — are High, Medium, or even Low here, reflecting Korea’s comparatively lower competing-ideology risk (no Mandate-of-Heaven-style state theology, no living-god emperor doctrine, no Maitreya-scale folk-messianic movement).
Review routing rationale
Critical and High risk doctrines (25 of 40, the lowest combined total in this batch) require mandatory human theologian review because an automated or native-speaker-only check could confirm the Korean is fluent and doctrinally literate-sounding without catching a subtle shamanistic-transactional undertone in a grace or power passage. Native speaker review is sufficient for Medium-risk doctrines, where the concern is more often achievement-culture framing (e.g. Mission to the Nations’ growth-metrics risk) than doctrinal contradiction.