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, Evangelism
Medium	7	Native speaker review	Apostleship, Prayer and Intercession, Spiritual Gifts, Mission to the Nations, Kingdom Mission
Low	3	Automated review only	Thanksgiving, Mutual Edification, Christian Fellowship

Why Critical doctrines cluster where they do, and why Evangelism is unusually High here

The seven Critical-risk doctrines each have at least one, and in several cases two, ready-made fluent-sounding wrong answers drawn independently from Hindu and Buddhist tradition — avatar-descent, reincarnation/rebirth, and nirvana-as-extinguishing-of-self all compete for the same doctrinal ground salvation, incarnation, and resurrection occupy. Evangelism is raised to High risk in this registry (Medium in comparable languages) because Nepal’s current criminal code restricts religious conversion — a live legal exposure that changes the review calculus from cultural sensitivity to legal risk.

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 Nepali is fluent to a Hindu-background reader without catching a Buddhist-coded misreading, or vice versa — and because evangelism content specifically carries legal stakes a native-speaker cultural read would not necessarily flag. Native speaker review is sufficient for Medium-risk doctrines, where the concern is cultural fit rather than doctrinal contradiction or legal exposure.