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 | 7 | Human theologian, every occurrence | Salvation, Incarnation, Deity of Christ, Sonship of Christ, Resurrection of Christ, Lordship of Christ, Messianic Promise |
| High | 23 | Human theologian | Gospel, Divine Calling, Grace, Faith, Sanctification, Universal Scope of the Gospel, Unity of Jews and Gentiles |
| Medium | 7 | Native speaker review | Apostleship, Prayer and Intercession, Spiritual Gifts, Mission to the Nations, Evangelism |
| Low | 3 | Automated review only | Thanksgiving, Mutual Edification, Christian Fellowship |
Why Critical doctrines cluster where they do
All seven Critical-risk doctrines share one property distinctive to Marathi: each has a ready-made, fluent-sounding word or image drawn from Warkari-Hindu bhakti devotion AND a separate, equally fluent-sounding word or image drawn from Navayana Buddhist teaching. This dual pattern reflects Maharashtra’s actual religious landscape, where these two systems coexist as live, present-day identities rather than one dominant tradition with occasional minority variation (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 Marathi is fluent without catching that it imports a contradictory theological framework from either tradition — or, in the case of universal human accountability, providence, and election, without catching that it inadvertently echoes the caste-karma birth-status framework that Ambedkarite Buddhist communities specifically rejected. Native speaker review is sufficient for Medium-risk doctrines, where the concern is cultural fit and sensitivity rather than doctrinal contradiction.