Custom Instructions for Dan3 Series¶
Reference Boundaries¶
In 03-analysis.md and CONCLUSION.md, you may cite:
- Scripture — the sole doctrinal authority
- dan3-XX studies — this series builds on itself
- Companion series — formal study series with their own methodology and evidence DBs:
- hist-XX (historicism, 19 studies)
- rev-XX (Revelation, 26+ studies)
- revs-XX (Revelation structure, 47 studies)
- sanc-XX (sanctuary, 30 studies)
- law-XX (law, 33 studies)
- cmd-XX (commandments, 17 studies)
- etc6-XX (eschatology, 27 studies)
- pvj-XX (parables/vineyard/judgment, 22 studies)
- Series documents (plan, methodology, HIST arguments doc)
You may NOT cite in analysis/conclusion: - Standalone studies (daniel-XX, dan10-XX, michael-the-archangel, rome-XX, 2-thessalonians-2-man-of-sin, nt-ties-XX, time-times-XX, abomination-XX, etc.) - External corpora (EGW, Bohr/Secrets Unsealed)
Standalone studies and external corpora inform phases 1-3 (reference, scoping, research) only. The research agent gathers the biblical data those sources pointed to.
Series Identity¶
- Series prefix:
dan3 - Evidence DB series tag:
dan3
Phase 5: Position Validation (Validate → Update → Re-validate)¶
CRITICAL RULE: Validators must check the study against what the position database says, NOT against the validator's own theological training knowledge. If the DB says the HIST position is X, and the study attributes Y to HIST, that is a misrepresentation even if the validator's training knowledge thinks Y is defensible. The DB is the authority on what each position holds.
Three-step process:¶
- Phase 5a — First Validation: Run all position validators. Each writes a validation report.
- Phase 5b — Targeted Update (if issues found): Read ALL validation reports, then make ONE targeted update pass on
03-analysis.mdandCONCLUSION.mdto fix the identified issues. Do NOT rewrite from scratch — make surgical edits to fix specific problems. Do NOT change content that validators approved. - Phase 5c — Re-validation: Run all position validators AGAIN on the updated files. Any issues that STILL remain after the update go to the gap ledger. Issues that were fixed are noted as resolved in the re-validation report.
If Phase 5a finds zero issues, skip 5b and 5c entirely.
COMPARE/SYNTHESIS validation focus: Check whether the study accurately represents each position. Do NOT flag missing arguments — the COMPARE study only compares what the perspective studies already said. DO flag if a position is misrepresented, strawmanned, or unfairly weakened. Also verify that the Specification-Match Matrix (if applicable) accurately reflects each position's E/N/I classifications from their respective perspective studies' Claim Verification tables. A COMPARE study should not upgrade an I-A(2) LOW match to I-A(1) HIGH.
HIST Validation (port 9882)¶
Launch a subagent that:
1. Reads D:/bible/tools/hist-position/DB-SUMMARY.md to understand the HIST position
2. Reads D:\Bible\bible-studies\dan3-14-COMPARE-daniel-8/CONCLUSION.md and D:\Bible\bible-studies\dan3-14-COMPARE-daniel-8/03-analysis.md
3. Searches the HIST position DB (port 9882):
D:\Bible\bible-studies\dan3-14-COMPARE-daniel-8/hist-validation.md with findings
- Include a summary line: LAYER 1 ISSUES: X (count of representation problems)
- Include a summary line: LAYER 2 ISSUES: Y (count of grounding problems)
- For each issue, specify the exact section, the nature of the problem, and what needs to change
PRET Validation (port 9884)¶
Launch a subagent that:
1. Reads D:/bible/tools/pret-position/DB-SUMMARY.md to understand the PRET position
2. Reads D:\Bible\bible-studies\dan3-14-COMPARE-daniel-8/CONCLUSION.md and D:\Bible\bible-studies\dan3-14-COMPARE-daniel-8/03-analysis.md
3. Searches the PRET position DB (port 9884):
D:\Bible\bible-studies\dan3-14-COMPARE-daniel-8/pret-validation.md with findings
- Include a summary line: LAYER 1 ISSUES: X (count of representation problems)
- Include a summary line: LAYER 2 ISSUES: Y (count of grounding problems)
- For each issue, specify the exact section, the nature of the problem, and what needs to change
FUT Validation (port 9883)¶
Launch a subagent that:
1. Reads D:/bible/tools/fut-position/DB-SUMMARY.md to understand the FUT position
2. Reads D:\Bible\bible-studies\dan3-14-COMPARE-daniel-8/CONCLUSION.md and D:\Bible\bible-studies\dan3-14-COMPARE-daniel-8/03-analysis.md
3. Searches the FUT position DB (port 9883):
D:\Bible\bible-studies\dan3-14-COMPARE-daniel-8/fut-validation.md with findings
- Include a summary line: LAYER 1 ISSUES: X (count of representation problems)
- Include a summary line: LAYER 2 ISSUES: Y (count of grounding problems)
- For each issue, specify the exact section, the nature of the problem, and what needs to change
Phase 5b: Targeted Update¶
If ANY validator found issues (LAYER 1 or LAYER 2 ISSUES > 0), perform ONE update pass:
1. Read ALL *-validation.md files in the study folder
2. For each Layer 1 issue:
- If MISREPRESENTED: Fix the specific claim to match what the position DB says
- If MISSING: Add the missing argument in the appropriate section
- If STRAWMANNED: Strengthen the presentation to match the DB's actual argument
- If WEAKNESS EXAGGERATED: Adjust the language to be fair
3. For each Layer 2 issue:
- If MISCLASSIFIED: Correct the E/N/I tier and confidence to match the evidence
- If UNGROUNDED: Add the missing biblical/historical evidence, or reclassify to a lower tier
- If MISSING COUNTER-EVIDENCE: Add to Tensions/Counter-evidence column; if it creates
competing E/N evidence, reclassify from I-A to I-B and apply the resolution protocol
- If UNVERIFIED HISTORICAL CLAIM: Cite a primary source, or reclassify from E-HIS to I-HIS
- If CHAIN DEPTH ERROR: Correct the I-A(n) notation to reflect actual inference steps
4. Use the Edit tool to make surgical changes — do NOT rewrite entire files
5. Keep all existing content that was NOT flagged
Phase 5c: Re-validation¶
After the update, re-run ALL validators using the same process as Phase 5a.
Each validator writes D:\Bible\bible-studies\dan3-14-COMPARE-daniel-8/{position}-revalidation.md.
For any issues that STILL remain after the update:
APPEND them to the gap ledger at D:\Bible\bible-studies\dan3-gap-ledger.md
Format each entry as:
### [dan3-14-COMPARE-daniel-8] {POSITION} — [brief description]
- **Study:** dan3-14-COMPARE-daniel-8
- **Position:** {POSITION}
- **Issue:** [strawmanned / mischaracterized / omitted from comparison / weakness exaggerated]
- **Detail:** [what specifically is wrong and what it should say]
- **Affected sections:** [which sections of CONCLUSION.md / 03-analysis.md need updating]
- **Note:** Persisted after one update attempt
--fix-gaps.
The validation agent may also search bible-studies, EGW, Secrets Unsealed, or the web to verify its findings. If it discovers a new argument that is biblical and compatible with the position, it can add it to the position DB.