Executive Summary — 1 Corinthians

English → Russian Language Package Extension

Curriculum: 1 Corinthians 1–16 | Core passage: 1 Corinthians 15:1–11 | Baseline: Romans Language Package (russian)

---

Why it matters

1 Corinthians pushes the Russian Language Package into territory the Romans baseline never had to address. Romans’ Critical risks clustered on one axis — forensic justification vs. Orthodox theosis. 1 Corinthians adds a second, sharper axis: Eucharistic/sacramental theology (chs. 10–11), plus a set of collision points unique to this book — a named Russian theological controversy (Sophiology, chs. 1–3), a living devotional practice (платок head covering, ch. 11), a vivid relic-veneration category (нетленные мощи, ch. 15), and the historical weight of анафема (ch. 16) and раскол (ch. 1). Get any of these wrong and the translation doesn’t just blur a doctrine — it signals a confessional allegiance the curriculum never intended to take a side on, or imports centuries of Russian ecclesiastical history into an ordinary pastoral sentence.

Key findings

• 30 doctrines tracked in assets/doctrine_risk_registry.json: 5 Critical, 19 High, 6 Medium, 0 Low — 24 of 30 (80%) require mandatory human theologian review, 6 require native speaker review, none are automated-only.
• 56 new terms introduced beyond the Romans baseline (08_core_glossary.md Section C): 4 Critical, 19 High, 17 Medium, 6 Low.
• 39 baseline Romans terms confirmed still load-bearing in 1 Corinthians, all Critical/High tiers carried forward unchanged (grace, salvation, sanctification, justification, resurrection, Lord, Son of God, Jesus, God, Holy Spirit among them).
• The single highest-stakes decision in the entire package: whether to render the Lord’s Supper as Вечеря Господня (Protestant register) or lean toward Евхаристия/Причастие (Orthodox register) — a term choice that, unlike anything in Romans, signals confessional identity to any Russian reader before a single doctrine is even taught.
• Chapter 15 (the core passage chapter) and Chapter 1 carry the highest doctrine density in the book — 8 active doctrines each — making both priority-one for QA sequencing.

Risks

• Sophiology collision (Critical, chs. 1–3): rendering “wisdom of God” with the elevated register Премудрость would pull Paul’s argument into a specific, named, 1935-condemned Russian theological controversy (Bulgakov) that has nothing to do with his point.
• Relic collision (High/Critical composite, ch. 15): “perishable/imperishable” (тленный/нетленный) directly overlaps нетленные мощи — incorrupt relics — risking a present-tense veneration reading instead of Paul’s future universal resurrection claim.
• Schism overstatement (High, ch. 1): раскол would import the 17th-century Old Believer Raskol and 1054 Great Schism into ordinary congregational quarrels — a “false amplification” risk running the opposite direction from most Romans-baseline risks (which tend toward understatement/flattening).
• Sectarian misreading (High, 15:29): this verse is directly cited by LDS/Mormon proxy-baptism doctrine; leaving it uncommented invites a documented real-world misreading.
• Folk-superstition curse readings (High, 5:5 and 11:27): “deliver to Satan” and “unworthily” both risk being heard through Russia’s live folk-magical проклятие (curse) category instead of as restorative church discipline.
• Living-practice double bind (High, ch. 11): the платок head-covering custom is not historical trivia in Russia — it’s practiced today — creating risk of either over-literalizing Paul’s instruction as timeless law or dismissing his actual argument as redundant with existing custom.

Opportunities

• Dostoevsky’s “деятельная любовь” gives chapter 13 unusually strong native literary scaffolding for Paul’s active, costly definition of love — a genuine asset, not just a risk to manage.
• Existing Orthodox pre-Communion self-examination practice is a real point of convergence that can be drawn on explicitly to make 11:27–30’s “unworthily” warning land as serious rather than superstitious.
• “Раб Божий” as a dignified devotional self-designation gives the раб Христов ownership language in chapters 6–9 a positive resonance a purely secular liberty-conscious reading would miss.
• The living платок custom and the Paschal greeting-kiss tradition (16:20) both offer immediate cultural intuition for practices most other language communities must explain as foreign historical artifacts.

Recommended actions

1. Lock in Вечеря Господня as primary + Евхаристия/Причастие named explicitly as the Lord’s Supper rendering across every occurrence before Phase 2 parallel processing begins (chs. 10–11 first).
2. Enforce мудрость (never Премудрость) for σοφία in chapters 1–3 via automated forbidden-substitution validation, not review-stage catch.
3. Require the explicit relic-distinction statement (future universal transformation vs. present-tense мощи) as a mandatory teaching-text element anywhere tленный/нетленный appears in chapter 15.
4. Route chapters 1, 6, 11, and 15 for first-pass human theologian review ahead of the remaining chapters, given their disproportionate concentration of Critical/High terms.
5. Attach the LDS proxy-baptism disclaimer as a fixed, non-optional teaching-text block wherever 15:29 is taught.
6. Confirm 08_core_glossary.md, bible_term_registry.json, doctrine_risk_registry.json, and this curriculum’s translation_memory.json are all merged and version-locked before any Phase 2 segment translation begins, per the load-and-enforcement procedure in 12_ai_translation_requirements.md.

---

This summary consolidates assets/translation_memory.json, assets/bible_term_registry.json, assets/doctrine_risk_registry.json, 08_core_glossary.md, 07_semantic_analysis.md, 06_linguistic_gap_analysis.md, 04_comparative_theology.md, and 11_doctrine_analysis.md. It does not introduce new terminology decisions; all renderings are authoritative per those source documents.