Theology Rubric v1.0 (set 2026-10-06)

Structure

• The page shows only the overall Theology score (1–5 stars, half stars allowed); opening it reveals the three sub-items, each with a reason and Scripture references.
• Three sub-items = Is it true → Toward whom → Is it clearly expressed:
  1. Biblical Accuracy
  2. Theological Focus (God-centeredness)
  3. Theological Clarity
• Overall score: check the floor first — if "Biblical Accuracy" is ≤ 2 stars → the overall score is capped at 2 stars; otherwise the three items are averaged with equal weight.
• "Gospel content," "the cross," "resurrection," "the Holy Spirit," "healing," "declarative language," "material blessing," and the like are content tags; they neither add nor subtract points.
• Theological depth (Accessible / Moderate / Deep) is a tag and does not enter the score; deep ≠ high in Theology.

1. Biblical Accuracy

• ★5 Statements are accurate overall and consistent with Scripture, with no obvious over-inference; metaphors are poetic but cause no substantive error.
• ★4 Correct overall, with a little simplification, imprecision, or individual wording that may be misunderstood, but no substantive error.
• ★3 Still within orthodox bounds, but oversimplified in many places or clearly vague, and some lines are easily taken as inaccurate statements.
• ★2 A clear and significant problem: singing what Scripture does not promise as a universal promise; clearly wrong statements about God, humanity, or salvation; making human merit the basis of salvation; clearly distorting Scripture; but not beyond the orthodox core.
• ★1 A fundamental error: conflict with the Apostles' Creed / Nicene Creed (denying the Trinity, Christ's two natures as God and man, the resurrection, etc.).

2. Theological Focus (God-centeredness)

Do not count how many times "I" appears; look at whom the whole song ultimately directs attention, hope, and worship toward. Psalm-style laments, confession, and petition can fully earn 5 stars. The review model must ask four questions in order:

1. Who is the final object of this song?
2. Is "I" speaking to God / responding / experiencing things in God, or is the song centered on the self?
3. Where do hope, grounds, and the source of salvation ultimately lie?
4. If the words for "God" are removed, is the remaining core only self-motivation, emotional healing, a success declaration, or romantic-style sentiment?

• ★5 "I" is praying to, responding to, pleading with, repenting before, and worshiping God; God is the final object, and hope is in God.
• ★4 Clearly God-centered, but with considerable space on human experience and emotion, still returning to God in the end.
• ★3 God and "I" are balanced in weight and it is hard to tell which is the core; not wrong, just the focus is not distinct.
• ★2 Mainly centered on my feelings, needs, growth, and victory; God is mostly the one who helps me reach my goals.
• ★1 The core is almost entirely self-fulfillment, self-affirmation, and emotional satisfaction; "God" is only decoration, and the content is basically unchanged if he is removed.

3. Theological Clarity

This rates how clear the theological orientation is, not language difficulty and not how well it is written. A simple song ("The LORD is my shepherd, I shall not want") can fully earn 5 stars. "It would work as a love song" is only an auxiliary test: in the Bible, people's love, longing, and nearness to God are natural.

• ★5 Who God is, who people are, whom "you" refers to, and the God-human relationship are all clear; even with many metaphors, they can be accurately understood from context.
• ★4 Clear overall, with one or two gaps or places open to different readings, but not misleading.
• ★3 The direction is understandable, but some key lines are vague, with many abstract words or too little context.
• ★2 The orientation is clearly vague: it is hard to determine who "you" is, and the song basically holds up in a secular setting.
• ★1 Cannot determine the object of faith or the core meaning; it holds up completely apart from a Christian context.

Principles Against Deducting Points (most important)

In the following cases points must not be deducted: being simple, repetitive, emotional, using the first person, not mentioning the cross, not mentioning the resurrection, not quoting much Scripture, using poetic metaphor, not covering all persons of the Trinity, not covering a complete doctrine of salvation, denominational distinctives (predestination, charismatic gifts, healing, declarations). Only when the lyrics clearly express something wrong, distorted, or seriously vague, or the theological focus clearly deviates, are points deducted.

Mistakes the Review Guards Against

1. Treating "not mentioned" as "denied."
2. Treating poetic rhetoric as literal theological statements.
3. Judging a song human-centered because the first person appears often.
4. Treating denominational preference as a biblical error.
5. Judging "I believe God will give me…" too harshly — distinguish biblical promises from packaging a personal wish as universal truth.
6. Filling in theology the author did not write — rate only what the lyrics explicitly express.
7. Treating "no problems" as "theologically rich" — theological depth is distinguished by the depth tag.

How the Standard Is Revised (and How Objections Are Used)

• Under each song's review, anyone can tap "I disagree" and publicly give reasons and Scripture; others can "Support" or "Don't support" it, and well-supported objections are listed first.
• TovCore does not rule on objections one by one, nor change an individual song's rating. When the standard is revised, well-supported objections are taken into account; the standard gets a new version number and every song is re-rated under it.
• Older objections show which version of the standard they were about. Factual errors such as a wrong title, author or lyrics source are not theological judgments and are corrected directly.