Linguistic Gap Analysis — 2 Thessalonians (Thai)

Purpose and Method

This analysis identifies where Thai either (a) lacks adequate vocabulary for a doctrine in this letter, or (b) has too much vocabulary — fluent, natural-sounding terms already claimed by Thai Buddhist doctrine or Thai folk religion that would import a false frame if used as the default gloss. It extends the baseline Romans/Galatians Language Package’s method (documented there for grace/merit, salvation/nibbana, resurrection/rebirth, incarnation/avatar, etc.) to 2 Thessalonians’ five curriculum doctrines: The Day of the Lord, The Man of Lawlessness, Perseverance under Persecution, God’s Righteous Judgment, Standing Firm in the Traditions, with 2 Thessalonians 2:1–12 as the theological anchor. Coverage spans the full letter, chapters 1–3.

Four outputs are required by Phase 1 Step 8:

1. Doctrine vocabulary matrix
2. Missing vocabulary vs. crowded semantic neighborhoods requiring fencing
3. Transliteration vs. paraphrase decisions
4. Ranked list of this letter’s highest-risk ambiguities

All renderings below are consistent with, and extend, 08_core_glossary.md and the updated bible_term_registry.json. No baseline (Romans/Galatians) term is altered.

---

1. Doctrine Vocabulary Matrix

For each of the five curriculum doctrines: the candidate Thai terms available in the language, their specific weaknesses, and the recommended strategy actually adopted (cross-referenced to the glossary).

1.1 The Day of the Lord

Candidate Thai term	Available sense	Weakness	Verdict
วันสิ้นโลก (“day the world ends”)	Generic apocalyptic doomsday	No personal acting subject; reads as an impersonal cosmic terminus, compatible with the Buddhist notion of a kalpa’s dissolution (การสิ้นกัป) followed by a new cycle — the very cyclical framing this doctrine must exclude	Rejected as stand-alone gloss
กัปสุดท้าย / การสิ้นกัป	Buddhist cosmological cycle-ending	Imports cyclical cosmology directly; a new kalpa always follows	Rejected outright
วันพิพากษา (“day of judgment”)	Judicial connotation	Correct judicial sense but drops the specifically Christ-centered, personal “of the Lord” framing; usable as a secondary descriptive gloss, not primary	Secondary/explanatory only
วันขององค์พระผู้เป็นเจ้า (established)	Compound: “day” + baseline “Lord” (องค์พระผู้เป็นเจ้า)	None significant; requires the full compound every time (never abbreviated to just “the day”)	Adopted. Retains องค์พระผู้เป็นเจ้า as explicit grammatical/theological subject at every occurrence (2:2), preventing collapse into an impersonal doomsday event.

Recommended strategy: Always render the full compound; never truncate. Add translator note at first occurrence (2:2) distinguishing linear, one-time, personal divine action from Buddhist cyclical world-ages.

1.2 The Man of Lawlessness

Candidate Thai term	Available sense	Weakness	Verdict
มาร / ปีศาจ (“demon/devil”)	Generic evil supernatural being	Misidentifies the man of lawlessness as a spirit-being rather than a human person empowered by Satan (2:9’s ซาตาน already fills the spirit-being role); collapses a key distinction the passage itself draws	Rejected
คนบาป (“sinful person”)	Generic sinner	Far too weak; loses the eschatological, singular, climactic identity	Rejected
ความอธรรม (built on ธรรม root)	“Non-dhamma” / unrighteousness in the dhammic sense	ธรรม is the foundational Pali/Sanskrit category for cosmic-moral order in Thai Buddhism; ความอธรรม risks being heard as “departure from the Dhamma teaching” rather than personal rebellion against the one true God’s revealed law	Retained despite the risk — see §2 below for the fencing strategy required to make this safe
มนุษย์แห่งความอธรรม (established)	“Man of lawlessness”	Requires mandatory theological framing (God as lawgiver) at every occurrence to prevent the ธรรม-root drift	Adopted with mandatory fencing note (§2.1)

Recommended strategy: No better root exists in Thai than ธรรม/อธรรม for law/lawlessness — this is a genuine “no adequate alternative” situation, not a case where a superior unused term is available. The mitigation must therefore be doctrinal framing (explicit reference to God as lawgiver at every occurrence), not lexical substitution.

1.3 Perseverance under Persecution

Candidate Thai term	Available sense	Weakness	Verdict
ขันติ (khanti)	Buddhist pāramī — patience/forbearance, one of ten perfections self-cultivated toward personal liberation	Highly fluent, the single most natural-sounding Thai word for “patient endurance” — and precisely for that reason the most dangerous: it silently converts Paul’s hope-sustained, Spirit-given endurance into a self-cultivated virtue accumulated for one’s own future benefit	Rejected as primary gloss (already flagged in baseline glossary)
ความทนทาน	Mechanical/physical endurance (materials, stamina)	Too flat; no relational or hope-oriented content	Insufficient alone
ความอดทน (established)	General “patience/endurance,” religiously less loaded than ขันติ	Some overlap risk remains since ความอดทน can still be heard generically; requires explicit anchoring to hope in Christ’s return (1:5, 7) every time it appears	Adopted, always co-occurring with explicit hope/Christ-language in context
เมตตา / กรุณา (for the paired “love_growing” term)	Buddhist brahmavihāra — loving-kindness/compassion	Detached, universally extended, meditatively cultivated benevolence, not Spirit-produced, relationally particular covenant love	Rejected for “love” (1:3); ความรัก retained

Recommended strategy: Retain ความอดทน (not ขันติ) for perseverance, and pair every occurrence with explicit surrounding language naming hope in Christ’s return as the sustaining cause (never leave “endurance” doctrinally unanchored in a standalone clause).

1.4 God’s Righteous Judgment

Candidate Thai term	Available sense	Weakness	Verdict
กรรม / เวรกรรม	Impersonal karmic cause-and-effect	The single most dangerous neighboring concept in the whole letter. Thai has a ready-made, culturally ubiquitous doctrine of impersonal moral cause-and-effect that would silently replace God as personal Judge with a self-operating cosmic mechanism — precisely at 1:6 (“righteous repayment”), 2:11 (“strong delusion”), and 2:12 (“judged/condemned”)	Rejected at every occurrence; God must remain explicit grammatical subject
ทำดีได้ดี ทำชั่วได้ชั่ว	Folk maxim, “do good get good, do evil get evil”	Same collision as above in proverbial form; already flagged Critical for Galatians 6:7-8 “sowing and reaping” — 2 Thessalonians 1:6 carries an equally acute version of the same risk	Must never surface even as an explanatory paraphrase
การลงโทษ (generic “punishment”)	Neutral punitive term	Usable as a component but insufficiently personal/judicial on its own	Component only, always qualified
เป็นการยุติธรรมที่พระเจ้าจะทรงตอบแทน, ถูกพิพากษาลงโทษ, ความลุ่มหลงที่พระเจ้าทรงส่งมาลงโทษ (established)	Full clausal constructions with พระเจ้า/ทรง as explicit subject	Verbose but doctrinally load-bearing; brevity would reintroduce the karma-collision risk	Adopted — verbosity here is a doctrinal safeguard, not a stylistic defect

Recommended strategy: Resist all pressure (including from later Phase 2 fluency review) to compress these constructions into shorter, more idiomatic Thai; the extra words carrying พระเจ้า/ทรง as grammatical subject are doing indispensable theological work distinguishing personal judgment from impersonal karma.

1.5 Standing Firm in the Traditions

Candidate Thai term	Available sense	Weakness	Verdict
ประเพณี	The fluent, natural Thai word for “tradition/custom”	Denotes negotiable cultural/folk custom (Songkran, ordination customs, merit-making customs, regional festivals) that Thai speakers readily regard as variable and locally adaptable — exactly the opposite of what Paul means by binding apostolic doctrine	Rejected as primary gloss (already established in baseline glossary)
หลักคำสอน	”Doctrine/core teaching”	Correct binding-authority sense but loses the “handed down/received” transmission sense central to παράδοσις	Insufficient alone
ศีล	Buddhist self-undertaken precepts/vows	Individually adopted for personal spiritual progress, not externally issued, community-wide, apostolically authoritative directives	Rejected for “command” (3:6, 3:12)
คำสอนที่ได้รับสืบทอด (established)	“Teaching that has been received/handed down”	None significant; correctly conveys both transmission and binding authority	Adopted, verbatim-identical at 2:15 and 3:6

Recommended strategy: Never substitute ประเพณี even as a “readability” synonym in later Phase 2 editorial passes; flag any such substitution for immediate theologian review as a Critical-tier violation.

---

2. Missing Vocabulary vs. Crowded Semantic Neighborhoods

2.1 Crowded neighborhoods requiring active fencing

These are cases where Thai has abundant, fluent, natural vocabulary immediately adjacent to the biblical concept — the opposite problem from a vocabulary gap, and in practice the more dangerous one, because a fluent-sounding translation feels correct while carrying a false frame.

Neighborhood	Biblical concept it threatens	Fencing strategy
กรรม / เวรกรรม / ทำดีได้ดีทำชั่วได้ชั่ว (karmic causality)	Righteous repayment (1:6), strong delusion (2:11), judged/condemned (2:12), sowing-family doctrines already fenced in the Galatians baseline	Full clausal constructions retaining พระเจ้า/องค์พระผู้เป็นเจ้า as explicit grammatical subject at every occurrence; never a bare noun-phrase gloss; mandatory theologian review flag on every occurrence per doctrine_risk_registry.json conventions
ธรรม / อธรรม (dhammic cosmic-moral order)	The Man of Lawlessness word-family (2:3, 2:7, 2:8, 2:9)	Mandatory explicit-lawgiver framing (God as the one whose law is being defied) attached to first occurrence in every lesson unit; cannot be lexically avoided since no non-ธรรม root exists for “lawlessness” in Thai — this is the letter’s one irreducible “crowded but unavoidable” neighborhood
ขันติ / ปารมี (self-cultivated perfections)	Perseverance/endurance (1:4, 3:5)	ความอดทน retained (not ขันติ), always paired with explicit hope-in-Christ anchoring in the same clause or sentence
ไสยศาสตร์ / คาถาอาคม / วัตถุมงคล (folk-magic potency, protective charms)	Lord’s protection (3:3), lying signs and wonders (2:9), power of God (1:11)	Divine-only honorific ทรง reserved strictly for God/Christ’s action; Satan’s/the lawless one’s parallel “power” vocabulary (2:9) explicitly stripped of ทรง and permanently bound to the แห่งความเท็จ (“of falsehood”) qualifier
กบฏ (political rebellion/coup)	Apostasy/rebellion (2:3)	The Thai word for political rebellion is loaded with contemporary and historical political sensitivity (repeated 20th–21st century coups); การกบฏละทิ้งความเชื่อ compounds it with ละทิ้งความเชื่อ (“abandoning the faith”) specifically to redirect the reading away from a political-coup frame and toward religious apostasy
ลาสิกขา (a monk’s routine, non-scandalous disrobing)	Apostasy/rebellion (2:3)	Same term as above; must not read as an ordinary, socially unremarkable status change — needs teaching-note contrast with the climactic, corporate, scandalous sense Paul intends
เสด็จ (royal/divine honorific “to come/go”)	Parousia (2:1, 2:8) applied ironically to the lawless one (2:9)	Deliberately retained at all three occurrences including 2:9 to preserve Paul’s ironic parody; flagged for mandatory translator note precisely because granting an honorific to the lawless one initially looks like an error to reviewers unfamiliar with the rhetorical strategy
อาจารย์–ศิษย์ (lifelong devotional teacher-disciple bond)	Imitate the apostolic example (3:7-9)	เอาเราเป็นแบบอย่าง kept deliberately plain/time-bound (a concrete labor example), avoiding vocabulary that would imply an enduring devotional master-disciple relationship
เสียหน้า (loss of face) as a social good to be avoided at all costs	Admonish as a brother (3:14-15), withdraw discipline (3:6, 3:14)	Explicit framing of both terms as restorative rather than punitive is required in teaching notes, since Thai social norms around face-preservation could otherwise cause churches to avoid this discipline altogether or apply it in a permanently ostracizing way that oversteps Paul’s intent

2.2 Genuine vocabulary gaps (no adequate existing Thai term)

Unlike §2.1, these are cases where Thai simply lacks any close native equivalent — the opposite failure mode, requiring compound construction or careful paraphrase rather than fencing an existing term.

Concept	Gap description	Strategy adopted
παρουσία (technical eschatological “coming/arrival,” distinct from ordinary arrival)	No single Thai word distinguishes a technical end-times “coming” from ordinary travel-arrival vocabulary	Use the royal/divine honorific compound การเสด็จมา, borrowing the monarchy-adjacent honorific register (already carefully bounded — see §3) rather than inventing a neologism
ἐπιφάνεια as distinct from παρουσία (a doubled emphasis at 2:8)	Thai has no natural way to double “coming” without sounding redundant	Two distinct compounds (การเสด็จมา / การปรากฏ) retained as separate terms specifically so the doubling is visible rather than flattened
τὸ κατέχον / ὁ κατέχων (the neuter-then-masculine “restrainer,” a deliberately ambiguous referent)	Thai has grammatical gender neutrality throughout (no forced masculine/neuter agreement), so the Greek’s own grammatical clue to the restrainer’s identity cannot be reproduced by grammar alone	Preserve the referential ambiguity itself (สิ่งที่ยับยั้งอยู่ / ผู้ที่ยับยั้งอยู่, “thing” vs. “person/agent” who restrains) rather than resolving the identity question in translation; the choice between the neuter-leaning สิ่งที่ and the personal ผู้ที่ becomes the translator’s main decision point and must be flagged for theologian review each time (see Ranked Ambiguities §4, item 1)
ἀποστασία as a technical, climactic, corporate, end-times event (distinct from ordinary apostasy/backsliding)	Thai’s available options (กบฏ, ลาสิกขา) each import an unwanted specific frame (political/monastic) rather than offering a neutral religious-apostasy term	การกบฏละทิ้งความเชื่อ compound retained (see §2.1) as the least-bad available construction, with mandatory disambiguating note
υἱὸς τῆς ἀπωλείας (Semitic destiny-idiom “son of destruction”)	Thai has no native idiom of “son of [abstract fate]” to name someone’s ultimate destiny	Direct compound calque บุตรแห่งความพินาศ, deliberately paralleling the established baseline พระบุตรของพระเจ้า construction so the dark parody is structurally visible to Thai readers who already know the baseline term
τὸ σημεῖον as “authenticating handwriting mark” (3:17)	No natural single Thai term for an author’s handwriting used specifically as anti-forgery verification in a religious-authoritative letter	Descriptive compound เครื่องหมายยืนยันความถูกต้อง (“mark confirming correctness/authenticity”) adopted; low doctrinal risk but genuinely no shorter native equivalent exists

---

3. Transliteration vs. Paraphrase Decisions

Term	Decision	Rationale
Σατανᾶς (Satan)	Transliterate: ซาตาน	No native Thai term names this specific personal being without either (a) borrowing a generic folk-demonic category (ผี, already forbidden elsewhere as a Holy Spirit substitute, and here risking the reverse error of diminishing Satan to a folk-ghost level) or (b) borrowing a Buddhist māra-adjacent term (มาร) that carries its own distinct doctrinal baggage (Māra as a tempter-figure within Buddhist cosmology, not the fallen personal enemy of the one true God). Transliteration avoids both false-equivalence directions and establishes ซาตาน as this curriculum’s own proper noun, consistent with how พระเยซู, พระคริสต์, and other proper names are handled.
ἡμέρα τοῦ κυρίου (Day of the Lord)	Paraphrase (compound, not transliteration): วันขององค์พระผู้เป็นเจ้า	A compound built entirely from already-established baseline vocabulary (วัน + องค์พระผู้เป็นเจ้า) is preferable to any transliteration option since none exists in Thai Bible tradition; paraphrase here carries zero additional loanword-comprehension burden for readers.
ἀνομία-family terms (lawlessness, man of lawlessness, lawless one, mystery of lawlessness)	Paraphrase using existing Thai morphology (ธรรม root + negating อ- prefix)	No transliteration option exists (this is a Greek compound concept, not a proper noun); paraphrase is unavoidable, which is precisely why the ธรรม-root collision (§1.2, §2.1) must be managed through mandatory doctrinal framing rather than lexical avoidance.
παρουσία / ἐπιφάνεια	Paraphrase using honorific compounds (การเสด็จมา / การปรากฏ), not transliteration (e.g., “parูเซีย”)	These are common Greek nouns describing an event, not proper names; a transliteration would be opaque to Thai readers and would forfeit the deliberate honorific-register signaling (เสด็จ) that does real doctrinal work (marking Christ’s action as royal/divine, and ironically marking the lawless one’s parody).
ἀπόστολος-adjacent term παράδοσις (traditions)	Paraphrase: คำสอนที่ได้รับสืบทอด, explicitly avoiding the natural transliteration-adjacent loanword-flavored alternative “ประเพณี” (a native Thai word, not a loanword, but flagged here because it is the “easy” default choice a translator might reach for)	See §1.5; the natural word is doctrinally wrong, and no transliteration option exists since this is not a proper name.
ἀμήν, Ἁλληλουϊά (Amen, Hallelujah — present in baseline conventions, relevant if used in closing doxology-adjacent material)	Transliterate: อาเมน, ฮาเลลูยาห์	Consistent with baseline 12_ai_translation_requirements.md transliteration standards; these are established Thai Bible loanwords with no risk profile.
Proper names: Παῦλος, Σιλουανός, Τιμόθεος (Paul, Silvanus, Timothy, 1:1)	Transliterate using established Thai Bible forms: เปาโล, สิลวานัส, ทิโมธี	Standard practice; no new risk introduced. Confirm สิลวานัส against the Thai Bible Society’s established form before Phase 2 (flagged for verification, not a doctrinal risk, simply a transliteration-consistency check).

General rule adopted: transliterate only proper nouns (persons, Satan as a unique named being, standard liturgical exclamations); paraphrase every doctrinal/conceptual term using existing Thai morphology, even where that morphology sits close to a Buddhist technical root (§2.1) — inventing wholly new coinages is avoided per the baseline’s instruction to “prefer terms already established in Thai Christian usage over inventing new coinages,” but within that constraint, compound calques built from baseline-established elements (§3, row 2 and 5) are preferred over drawing directly from an existing crowded neighborhood term.

---

4. Ranked List of Highest-Risk Ambiguities in 2 Thessalonians

Ranked by combined severity (doctrinal centrality × collision likelihood with an existing fluent Thai neighboring concept), consistent with the Critical/High/Medium/Low framework.

1. [CRITICAL] Strong delusion sent by God (2:11), ความลุ่มหลงที่พระเจ้าทรงส่งมาลงโทษ — The single highest Thai-specific risk in the letter. A shorter, more natural-sounding rendering is always one editorial pass away from collapsing into เวรกรรม/เคราะห์กรรม (impersonal karmic misfortune), silently replacing God’s deliberate judicial action with a self-operating cosmic mechanism. Mitigation: mandatory verbose clausal construction retaining พระเจ้า and ทรง as explicit subject/honorific in every occurrence; permanent theologian-review flag; explicit prohibition on ever shortening this phrase for “readability” in any later Phase 2 or Phase 3 pass.

2. [CRITICAL] The Man of Lawlessness word-family (2:3, 7, 8, 9) built on the ธรรม root — Irreducible collision: no non-ธรรม root exists in Thai for “lawlessness,” so unlike most other Critical risks in this analysis, this one cannot be resolved by choosing a different lexical item. Mitigation: mandatory explicit-lawgiver framing (God as the one being defied) attached at first occurrence in every lesson unit covering 2:3, 7, 8, or 9; theologian review on every occurrence per the doctrine risk registry.

3. [CRITICAL] Righteous repayment / God’s righteous judgment (1:6, 1:8, 2:12) vs. the folk maxim ทำดีได้ดี ทำชั่วได้ชั่ว and กรรม — Structurally near-identical surface logic (“what one does returns to one”) to the most ubiquitous moral maxim in Thai popular culture, taught from childhood. Mitigation: full clausal constructions with พระเจ้า/องค์พระผู้เป็นเจ้า as explicit grammatical subject at every occurrence; absolute prohibition on the proverb’s surface phrasing appearing even as an explanatory gloss in teaching notes.

4. [HIGH] Parousia’s honorific verb เสด็จ applied ironically to the lawless one at 2:9 — A reviewer unfamiliar with the deliberate parody could “correct” this occurrence by downgrading it to a non-honorific verb (มา), destroying Paul’s rhetorical point that the lawless one’s coming counterfeits Christ’s. Equally, over-application of the honorific elsewhere risks blurring Christ’s unique lordship with generic royal-address register. Mitigation: mandatory translator note flagging 2:9 specifically as an intentional parody, cross-referenced to 2:1 and 2:8 for comparison.

5. [HIGH] The Restrainer’s genuinely ambiguous referent and neuter-to-masculine shift (2:6-7) — Thai’s lack of forced grammatical gender means the translator, not the grammar, must decide between สิ่งที่ยับยั้งอยู่ (impersonal “thing”) and ผู้ที่ยับยั้งอยู่ (personal “one”), a decision Paul’s Greek itself defers by using both forms across two verses. Mitigation: preserve both forms exactly at their respective verses (สิ่งที่ at 2:6, ผู้ที่ at 2:7) rather than harmonizing to one; flag every occurrence for theologian review; explicit instruction that the translation must not resolve the disputed identity question (Holy Spirit / Roman law / angelic power) that centuries of interpreters have debated.

6. [HIGH] Apostasy/rebellion (2:3) between the political-coup register of กบฏ and the routinized-disrobing register of ลาสิกขา — Both native options import an unwanted specific real-world frame (a literal coup in a country with repeated 20th-21st century coups; or an unremarkable status change for an individual monk) in place of Paul’s climactic, corporate, end-times falling-away. Mitigation: retain the compound การกบฏละทิ้งความเชื่อ with mandatory disambiguating teaching note at first occurrence.

7. [HIGH] Perseverance/endurance (1:4, 3:5) vs. ขันติ — Even with ความอดทน correctly adopted over ขันติ, the risk persists that teachers or informal paraphrase drift toward ขันติ in oral instruction (since it is the more “natural-sounding” word in casual register) even when the written text is correct. Mitigation: explicit note in teacher-training materials (beyond the translation itself) flagging ขันติ as forbidden even in spoken elaboration, not just in the written translation.

8. [HIGH] “Worthy of his calling” (1:11) vs. บุญ-based worthiness — “Worthy” (ทรงให้ท่านสมกับการทรงเรียก) risks being heard, especially by first-generation believers from a Buddhist background, as analogous to becoming “worthy” of blessing through accumulated merit (บุญ), rather than as God’s own gracious act performed in the believer. Mitigation: the established compound already places ทรง (divine honorific, God as agent) before the “worthy” verb; this must never be simplified to a bare adjective phrase (“สมควร”) that would drop the divine-agency marker.

9. [MEDIUM] Traditions (2:15, 3:6) vs. ประเพณี drift in later editorial passes — Lower ranked than the above because the correct term (คำสอนที่ได้รับสืบทอด) is already unambiguous and verbose enough to resist casual substitution, but flagged because ประเพณี is exactly the kind of “smoother-sounding” synonym a well-meaning later editor unfamiliar with this analysis might introduce for readability. Mitigation: explicit prohibition recorded in translation memory notes (see companion 08_core_glossary.md entry) against ever substituting ประเพณี, with automatic flag if it appears in any draft.

10. [MEDIUM] Lying signs and wonders (2:9) losing its แห่งความเท็จ qualifier under compression — In a culture where miraculous power (ฤทธิ์) commonly functions as a validating credential for religious authority (monks, mediums, amulets), any abbreviation that drops “of falsehood” would make the phrase read as approving, rather than condemning, the lawless one’s miracles. Mitigation: treat แห่งความเท็จ as a non-optional, permanently attached qualifier, never elidable even in space-constrained formatting (e.g., section headings, slide text) in Phase 2/3 downstream materials.

---

Summary Table: Fencing Priority

Priority	Domain	Fencing mechanism
1	กรรม/เวรกรรม vs. God’s judgment (1:6, 2:11, 2:12)	Explicit personal-subject clausal constructions; forbidden proverb-surface phrasing
2	ธรรม/อธรรม vs. Man of Lawlessness (2:3, 7, 8, 9)	Mandatory lawgiver-framing note at first occurrence per unit
3	ขันติ vs. perseverance (1:4, 3:5)	ความอดทน only, always hope-anchored in context; teacher-training note against oral drift
4	ประเพณี vs. traditions (2:15, 3:6)	Verbatim-identical compound; automatic flag on substitution
5	เสด็จ honorific scope (2:1, 8, 9)	Preserve identical honorific at all three occurrences; mandatory parody note at 2:9
6	กบฏ/ลาสิกขา vs. apostasy (2:3)	Compound retained with disambiguating note
7	ฤทธิ์เดช shared root, God vs. counterfeit (1:11 vs. 2:9)	ทรง- reserved for God only; แห่งความเท็จ permanently attached to the counterfeit occurrence

---

This analysis feeds directly into Phase 1 Step 1’s 08_core_glossary.md and the Phase 2 setup additions to translation_memory.json, bible_term_registry.json, and doctrine_risk_registry.json. All fencing mechanisms identified here must be encoded as translator notes or validation rules in the Phase 2 12_ai_translation_requirements.md update for this curriculum.