kclimenhaga
commented
2 years ago I suspect that any such language will result in too narrow of a key verse list. In practice, what I do as a question writer is to assume that all verses can be included, and then only exclude them if I feel they do not meet an acceptable level of significance. This wording would require me to do the opposite, and assume that no verses can be included, then subject each verse to this test to decide whether I can include them. I think the language around this needs to be vague, because I don't think there will be any sort of criteria that would allow different question writers to come up with identical lists.
For example: Luke 2:5: "He went there to register with Mary, who was pledged to be married to him and was expecting a child." I would argue that this verse is spiritually significant, since it talks about one of the conditions necessary for the nativity (Mary and Joseph going to Bethlehem). However, according to the criteria you described, I would say it is not spiritually significant, since it does not explicitly express an identifiable tenet of Christianity, nor are Mary and Joseph following doctrine at that moment in time.
gryphonshafer
scottpeterson
jswingle
In the 2018 rule book and in the current best practices document, there's a requirement that verses to be written as Q/F type questions be "spiritually significant". These rules were moved to the best practices document because they were subjective and therefore sometimes not followed. Moving them to the best practices kept the v1 rule book functionality equivalent to the 2018 rule book, but the desire is to prevent verses poorly suited for Q/F types from being used on such questions.
One possible solution is to do 3 things:
While the second and third item are easy, the first item is not easy. What follows is a draft of an idea that might work as an 80% solution for the first item. (This may need some additional edit iterations.)