Suppose $(a_n)_{n\in\mathbb{N}}$ is a strictly increasing sequence of positive integers such that $\displaystyle\sum_{n\in\mathbb{N}} \frac{1}{a_n}$ diverges, i.e. $(a_n)_{n\in\mathbb{N}}$ is "large".
Is it true that for every $k\in\mathbb{N},$ there exists a subsequence of $(a_n)_{n\in\mathbb{N}}$ of length $k,\ (a_{n_i})_{i=1}^{k},\ $ and integers $c\in\mathbb{Z}$ and $d\geq 1$ with $(c,d) \neq (0,1),\ $ such that $(c + d a_{n_i})_{i=1}^{k}$ is also a subsequence of $(a_n)_{n\in\mathbb{N}}$ ?
It is easy to come up with counter-examples for "small" sets of positive integers i.e. ones where $\displaystyle\sum_{n\in\mathbb{N}} \frac{1}{a_n}$ converges, by avoiding the self-similarity when you choose the next number (you can even do this for $k=3$, for example) but I doubt a similar low-complexity (i.e. elementary) construction will work for large sets.
If we assume Erdős conjecture to be true, then the proposition is true, because under this assumption, for each $k\in\mathbb{N}$ we can find an A.P. $a, a+b, a+2b, \ldots, a+kb$ of length $k+1$, and then let $a_{n_1} = a,\ a_{n_2} = a+b,\ \ldots, a_{n_k} = a+(k-1)b,\ $ and $\ c= b;\ d=1$. So if the proposition had a counter-example, then this would also be a counter-example to Erdős conjecture, which seems unrealistically simple considering all the advanced attempts to solve Erdős conjecture. Also, Erdős conjecture is an open problem, so we cannot use it in trying to prove the affirmative of the proposition..