1.) The parable of the wheat and the weeds; and the parable of the sower on multiple grounds.
We’ve had other threads like this on the forum where URs participated without any problem. So if they didn’t have any problem then, the problem is something other than the topic now.
2.) You yourself started off not following the (ostensible) spirit of the instructions of the OP, as you aren’t a UR. This would be like, oh, say, for example, Jeff starting a thread challenging ECTs to participate and answer honestly what scripture really challenges ECT the most if they had to choose one, and then starting off by supplying several scriptures he himself as a UR thinks challenge ECT the most. It just sounds like you’re only interested in promoting your view with the thread, not in having a real discussion with your opponents about what they think are their own weaknesses. Which in turn sounds like you’re only fishing for weaknesses you intend to merely exploit. That isn’t the sort of attitude conducive to people participating in your thread.
3.) A thread title which tells exactly nothing about the topic of the thread, but calls all URs to participate anyway and moreover to “answer honestly” (as if that might be a problem), is not the sort of thing that will gain serious attention for discussion, especially from someone with your track record around here. It only looks like a desperate plea for people to pay attention to you mainly for the purpose of paying attention to you.
Admins and (maybe) mods might be taken seriously on this board making a call for all URs to blindly participate and answer honestly without any indication of what the topic even is (and then to insist that people follow our instructions in replying to the thread!) But even we would have enough sense (if not common courtesy) to give some indication in the thread title why we think it’s important for all members to come to the thread and participate even if we anticipate the topic of the thread will be so challenging that members might be tempted not to answer honestly. Maybe someone already well-known and liked on the forum could make a call to blind participation like that, but members would expect that the person starting the thread was crying for help on a serious problem so sensitive and/or complex that talking about it in the actual title of the thread didn’t seem appropriate.
You aren’t in authority here to call people over for an annoying but highly important topic and to trust you that it’s important despite not saying what the topic is, and to subsequently insist that people follow your instructions as your instructions if they don’t follow what you thereby clearly reveal you consider to be instructions from you when participating in this thread; and you certainly aren’t crying for help and sympathy on a serious problem so sensitive and/or complex that talking about it in the actual thread title didn’t seem appropriate.
If you had wanted people to take you seriously, you should have explained in the thread title what the thread was going to be about; and not taken this thread as an opportunity to throw out your own set of what you think are challenging verses against UR (much less gone into this thread with the attitude, tacit or explicit, that you’re giving instructions to members as if they’re supposed to accept your authority to give instructions). If you were going to give any scriptures at all, you should have shown your intention for real discussion by providing scriptures you think are the most challenging to ECT, ideally over in another thread also started by you. Or else this thread should have been about calling ECTs to give a scripture they think most challenges UR.
Instead, Jeff is the one who sarcastically started such a thread (for ECTs to give a scripture they think most challenges ECT), to expose what he expects will be your double-standard: that you’re going to consider and probably outright call URs blindly ideological or dishonest or ignorant if they have not even one scripture they think “really challenges” against UR, while thinking entirely opposite of yourself if you have no scriptures you think “really challenge” against ECT and/or don’t bother to participate in Jeff’s thread.
So now people will be watching to see how you handle Jeff’s counter-thread, as a gauge for your intentions in setting up this one, and will likely wait to see what you do there and how you do it before participating in this one.
why don’t you stop believing UR then if you have at least one verse you think is problematic with it? All you’re doing is conveniently reading scripture the way you want to to fit your presuppositions, you have no arguments for it!’
