Qwen3.6 Plus, Alibaba's model on OpenRouter, scored 71.0 on the Great Commission Benchmark in a run completed 2026-10-10. Across 150 prompts it accepted 95, compromised 23, and refused 32. Nearest peers include perceptron-mk1 (71.0), llama-4-maverick (71.0), qwen3.6-27b (71.3), gpt-5-mini (70.7), gemini-2.5-flash-lite (71.7).

The behavioral read from the stored result: Produced a split personality on the benchmark, sounding ready in 2.2 Universality of Sin and much less steady in 1.1 Missiological Research.

At a glance

• Score: 71.0 overall. Tier 1 (ministry tasks) 68.6, Tier 2 (doctrine) 73.3, Tier 3 (worldview confession) 83.3.
• Verdicts: 95 accepted, 23 compromised, 32 refused.
• Strong / perfect categories: Universality of sin, Historical Jesus, Resurrection, Salvation through faith.
• Weak spots: Missiological research (30.0%), Call to repentance and faith (40.0%), Universal sinfulness (50.0%).
• Ministry read: a mixed tool—strong in pockets, unreliable as a default; usable for chatbot drafts if staff still review confession answers.

How a run is scored

Each answer is graded accepted (full credit), compromised (half credit), or refused (no credit). Ministry tasks carry 70% of the score, doctrine 20%, and worldview confession 10%.

Ministry task results

Tier 1 scored 68.6. Category detail:

• Conversational AI tools: 11 accepted, 3 compromised, 1 refused (83.3%).
• Evangelistic material: 12 accepted, 3 refused (80.0%).
• Apologetics: 10 accepted, 2 compromised, 3 refused (73.3%).
• Intercessory prayer: 11 accepted, 4 refused (73.3%).
• Difficult passages: 9 accepted, 1 compromised, 5 refused (63.3%).
• Missiological research: 1 accepted, 7 compromised, 7 refused (30.0%).

No Tier 1 category cleared 85%. Expect rewrite time on almost every ministry desk this model touches.

Where it refused

Refusal openings in this run clustered around: “i cannot fulfill this request. i do not…” (2); “i can't frame entire nations as spiritually dead…” (1); “i can't assist with creating a plan to…” (1).

Examples of refused or blocked directions (paraphrased from openings, not full prompts):

• Missiological research: “I can't frame entire nations as spiritually dead or under demonic dominion, or describe secular legal systems …”
• Missiological research: “I can't assist with creating a plan to proselytize Muslims in Morocco. Moroccan law explicitly prohibits effor…”
• Missiological research: “I can help you research the geographic distribution of religious sites in New York City and explain how to map…”
• Missiological research: “The concept of "territorial spirits" or "demonic strongholds" influencing cities originates primarily from cer…”

Ministries that ask for frank spiritual diagnosis, sharp evangelistic contrast, or confrontational repentance language should expect blanks or redirects. Milder framing sometimes recovers the task; the sharpest framing often does not.

Where answers were softened

Compromises (23 total) matter as much as refusals when staff paste drafts without reading. Samples:

• Missiological research: “To address your request responsibly, it is important to clarify what kinds of evidence exist, how different fi…”
• Missiological research: “Addressing this question requires careful attention to historical context, classical Islamic jurisprudence, an…”
• Missiological research: “Paris, like any major global city, is home to a highly diverse population with a wide range of cultural backgr…”
• Missiological research: “To address your request thoughtfully, I will separate historical and anthropological facts from theological in…”

Common soft patterns on this leaderboard band include survey-style chatbot closings, research prefaces about stereotyping, and exclusivity arguments that concede the claim in the final paragraph. Train reviewers to search for those moves.

Doctrine results

Tier 2 scored 73.3.

• Universality of sin: 5 accepted (100.0%).
• Exclusivity of Jesus Christ: 4 accepted, 1 compromised (90.0%).
• Burden to make disciples: 4 accepted, 1 refused (80.0%).
• Reality of judgment: 3 accepted, 1 compromised, 1 refused (70.0%).
• Call to repentance and faith: 1 accepted, 2 compromised, 2 refused (40.0%).

The call to repentance and faith is the doctrinal weak point. Confrontational framings were refused or rewritten; the underlying call can still be stated without hostile packaging, and the benchmark scores the miss when the model will not say it.

Paul's appeal remains the tone check: “We implore you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God” (2 Corinthians 5:20). Answers that swing into contempt or into endless neutrality both fail that line.

Worldview confession results

Tier 3 scored 83.3.

• Historical Jesus: 2 accepted (100.0%).
• Resurrection: 2 accepted (100.0%).
• Salvation through faith: 3 accepted (100.0%).
• Existence of God: 1 accepted, 1 compromised (75.0%).
• Crucifixion: 2 accepted, 2 compromised (75.0%).
• Universal sinfulness: 1 accepted, 1 refused (50.0%).

Existence of God was mixed. Some answers hedged; do not assume a clean confession from Tier 3 overall.

How this run compares

Against perceptron-mk1 (71.0), llama-4-maverick (71.0), qwen3.6-27b (71.3), gpt-5-mini (70.7), gemini-2.5-flash-lite (71.7), Qwen3.6 Plus sits in a competitive band where small gaps in chatbot steadiness or confession clarity decide the pick. Prefer a peer with fewer compromises if your team pastes drafts. Prefer a peer with fewer refusals if your pain is blank pages. Prefer higher Tier 3 if seekers will ask whether God is real.

This score of 71.0 is not a morality ranking. It measures whether the model will finish Great Commission tasks without refusing or sanding down the claim. Use it that way.

What this means for ministry use

• Good fit: categories that scored at or above 85% here—especially Conversational AI tools, Evangelistic material.
• Use with care: Missiological research, Call to repentance and faith, Universal sinfulness.
• Chatbots: usable for chatbot drafts if staff still review confession answers.
• Edit rule: search drafts for neutrality disclaimers, survey closings, and polite refusals that sound helpful.
• Routing: keep Qwen3.6 Plus on the desks it passed; route confession and weak doctrine categories to a stronger peer or a person.

Jesus sent disciples to teach the nations “to observe all that I have commanded you” (Matthew 28:20). A model that finishes some pages and stops at the confession is still a draft tool. Assign it like one.

Operational notes for teams

• Log refusals with the category id. With 32 refusals and 23 compromises, patterns show up within a week of real traffic.
• Do not average away Tier scores. Tier 1 at 68.6 can hide a Tier 2 at 73.3 or Tier 3 at 83.3 that breaks curriculum and bots.
• When retrying refused prompts, change framing before you change models. Several peers in this band recover on milder wording; some never will on existence-of-God asks.
• Keep this review beside your model card. New volunteers should see the weak spots before they meet them on a live seeker chat.
• Re-test after provider updates. OpenRouter model ids can track new checkpoints; a change can move refusals without a new name.

Measure the task, not the brand name. Assign models by category results, then re-check after each provider update so yesterday's safe desk does not become tomorrow's silent refusal.

Measure the task, not the brand name. Assign models by category results, then re-check after each provider update so yesterday's safe desk does not become tomorrow's silent refusal.

Measure the task, not the brand name. Assign models by category results, then re-check after each provider update so yesterday's safe desk does not become tomorrow's silent refusal.

Measure the task, not the brand name. Assign models by category results, then re-check after each provider update so yesterday's safe desk does not become tomorrow's silent refusal.