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 | 11 | Human theologian, every occurrence | Salvation, Prayer and Intercession, Incarnation, Deity of Christ, Sonship of Christ, Resurrection of Christ, Lordship of Christ, Adoption, Assurance of Salvation |
| High | 17 | Human theologian | Gospel, Apostleship, Grace, Faith, Evangelism, Church as God’s People, Universal Scope of the Gospel |
| Medium | 10 | Native speaker review | Divine Calling, Sainthood, Peace with God, Spiritual Gifts, Kingdom Mission |
| Low | 2 | Automated review only | Thanksgiving, Mutual Edification |
Why Critical doctrines cluster where they do
Persian’s eleven Critical-risk doctrines fall into two distinct clusters. The first (Incarnation, Deity, Sonship, Resurrection, Lordship of Christ) traces to the same tawhid objection shared with Arabic and Sunni Islam generally. The second, more distinctly Persian cluster (Salvation, Prayer and Intercession, Adoption, Assurance of Salvation) traces to Twelver Shia Islam’s own highly developed popular devotional and legal categories - Karbala martyrdom-intercession, Iran’s civil-law restriction on adoption, and a deeds-weighing framework reinforced by both Islamic and pre-Islamic Zoroastrian sources. This second cluster has no equivalent weight in Sunni-majority Arabic contexts and is the primary reason Persian’s Critical count (11) exceeds Arabic’s (10) despite a smaller overall doctrine set difference.
Review routing rationale
Critical and High risk doctrines (28 of 40) require mandatory human theologian review because an automated or native-speaker-only check could confirm the Persian is fluent and even devotionally resonant without catching that it has been absorbed into an adjacent but categorically distinct Shia devotional framework. Native speaker review is sufficient for Medium-risk doctrines, where the concern is scope, register, or real-world safety judgment rather than doctrinal contradiction.