Doctrine Analysis

This curriculum’s doctrine registry tracks 40 doctrines drawn from Romans 1-16, each recorded in full in doctrine_risk_registry.json with its risk tier, key terms, primary passages, and review routing.

Risk distribution

• Critical (6): Incarnation, Deity of Christ, Sonship of Christ, Resurrection of Christ, Salvation, and Prayer and Intercession. All six require human theologian review for every occurrence, because each has a fluent, culturally weighty Buddhist, folk-religious, or ancestor-veneration substitute that inverts the doctrine.
• High (13): doctrines including Grace, Adoption, Sainthood, Lordship of Christ, and Universal Human Accountability, where mistranslation creates serious theological confusion even if it doesn’t outright invert the doctrine.
• Medium (18): doctrines like Gospel, Faith, Sanctification, and Church as God’s People, where a native speaker review is sufficient because the risk is reduced clarity rather than doctrinal inversion.
• Low (3): Thanksgiving, Mutual Edification, and Christian Fellowship, cleared for automated review.

Why Prayer and Intercession is uniquely dangerous in Vietnamese

Unlike this Language Package’s other languages, where the highest-risk substitute is a religious concept practiced with some regularity, thờ cúng tổ tiên (ancestor veneration, including petitioning the dead) is observed across religious lines in Vietnam and reinforced at every family death anniversary and Tết celebration. This makes Prayer and Intercession the doctrine most likely to be quietly reinterpreted through an extremely familiar, emotionally significant lens without anyone noticing a translation problem.

Why Resurrection and Salvation are both Critical, not just one

Most of this Language Package’s other Buddhist-influenced languages treat resurrection and salvation as a linked pair of risks stemming from the same rebirth cosmology. Vietnamese specifically has two distinct, equally fluent competing words (đầu thai/luân hồi for rebirth, giải thoát for liberation) rather than one overlapping concept, meaning both doctrines need independent, equally rigorous enforcement rather than being treated as a single combined risk.

Review routing summary

19 of 40 doctrines (all Critical and High) route to mandatory human theologian review; 18 Medium-risk doctrines route to native speaker review; 3 Low-risk doctrines are cleared for automated review only. See doctrine_risk_registry.json’s risk_summary block for the exact counts.