JSON Schema defines valid data structures—what fields are required, what types are acceptable, what values are permitted. Data that doesn't match the schema gets rejected. This prevents invalid data from corrupting systems.
Creeds function similarly in theology—defining valid Christian confession, specifying required beliefs, establishing boundaries for orthodox faith. Theologies that don't match creedal schema are rejected as heretical. This protects church from doctrinal corruption.
Required Fields
JSON schemas specify required fields—data must include these or it's invalid. Optional fields may be present but aren't necessary for validity.
Historic creeds identify required Christian beliefs—Trinity, deity of Christ, bodily resurrection, salvation by grace. These aren't optional for Christian faith; they're schema requirements. You can't have valid Christianity without them.
Type Checking
Schemas enforce type requirements—this field must be string, that field must be number. Wrong types cause validation failure even if the data is present.
Creeds enforce doctrinal types—monotheism not polytheism, incarnation not mere theophany, resurrection not spiritual immortality. Having beliefs about these topics isn't sufficient—they must be correct types of belief.
My Autistic Validation
As an autistic person, I appreciate explicit validation rules. Don't leave requirements implicit—define them clearly. Schema validation removes ambiguity: either data matches or it doesn't.
Creeds provide similar clarity. They don't leave essential doctrines vague or debatable—they specify exactly what Christians must believe. This removes confusion about what constitutes orthodox Christianity.
Enum Restrictions
Schemas can restrict values to specific enumerations—field must be "red," "blue," or "green," not arbitrary values.
Christological creeds work similarly—Jesus must be "truly God and truly man," not "mostly God," "spiritual being," or other non-enumerated options. The valid values are specified; others are rejected.
Additional Properties
Schemas can allow or forbid additional properties beyond those specified. Strict schemas reject any unspecified fields; permissive schemas allow extra data.
Creeds are relatively permissive—they specify required minimums but allow additional beliefs that don't contradict essentials. You can hold various eschatological views, worship preferences, secondary doctrines as long as you affirm creedal requirements.
Validation vs. Coercion
Good validation rejects invalid data rather than coercing it into valid form. Don't silently convert incorrect types; explicitly fail and require correct input.
Creeds similarly reject heresy rather than accommodating it. Don't reinterpret Arianism as acceptable variant—reject it explicitly. Orthodoxy requires precision, not generous reinterpretation of invalid doctrine.
Schema Evolution
Schemas evolve as requirements change—new versions add fields, remove obsolete ones, tighten or loosen restrictions.
Creedal formulation similarly developed historically. Nicene Creed clarified Trinity against Arianism. Chalcedonian Definition specified Christ's two natures against monophysitism. Each creed refined schema in response to new heresies attempting invalid doctrines.
But unlike software schemas, core Christian truth doesn't change. Creedal development isn't arbitrary revision—it's clarifying unchanging truth against new challenges.
Backward Compatibility
Sometimes new schema versions maintain backward compatibility—old valid data remains valid under new schema. Other times breaking changes occur—previously valid data now fails validation.
Creedal development aimed for backward compatibility. Nicaea didn't invalidate apostolic teaching—it clarified it. Chalcedon didn't contradict Nicaea—it built on it. Each refinement maintained compatibility with previous valid confession while excluding newly-identified heresies.
American Doctrinal Relativism
American culture resists doctrinal precision. "That's just your interpretation." "All views are equally valid." "Don't judge." This is schema-less approach—accepting any belief as valid Christianity.
But lack of schema leads to corruption. Without validation, heresy enters unchecked. Invalid doctrines corrupt theology like invalid data corrupts databases. Precision isn't legalism—it's necessary protection.
Nested Requirements
Schemas can have nested requirements—if field A is present, then field B becomes required. Complex dependencies between different parts of data.
Creeds have similar structure. If you confess Christ's deity, you must also confess His humanity (Chalcedon). If you affirm salvation by grace, you must reject works-righteousness (Reformation confessions). Doctrines have dependencies that creeds make explicit.
Conclusion
JSON Schema validation protects system integrity by rejecting invalid data. Creeds protect doctrinal integrity by rejecting invalid theology.
My autistic appreciation for explicit rules makes me value both. Don't leave requirements implicit or validation fuzzy. Define clear schema. Validate rigorously. Reject what doesn't match.
This isn't narrow-mindedness—it's necessary precision. Critical systems can't function with corrupted data. The church can't maintain truth with corrupted doctrine. Validation protects what matters.
The creeds are Christianity's schema—specifying required beliefs, defining valid doctrine, establishing boundaries for orthodox confession. They're not exhaustive (they allow additional properties) but they're precise about essentials.
And like good schema validation: they reject invalid doctrine explicitly rather than accommodating it generously. Arian Christology fails validation. Pelagian soteriology doesn't match schema. Modalist trinitarianism gets rejected.
Not because creeds are arbitrary or restrictive, but because they accurately specify what valid Christianity must include. The schema matches reality—God's actual self-revelation in Scripture.
Until Christ returns and we know fully, creeds provide validated schema for Christian confession—tested across centuries, refined against heresies, specifying essentials while allowing appropriate diversity.
Validate your theology. Check it against creedal schema. If it doesn't match, don't try to coerce conformity—either revise your beliefs or acknowledge you're outside orthodox Christianity.
Like good JSON validation: precise, explicit, protective. Ensuring data integrity through rigorous standards. Protecting what matters by rejecting what doesn't match.