Well, shall we get into, so we have King King's version onlyists.

We have quite a bit of that in our subreddit.

Is this a question we prepared here?

So this is, we're going off script here for a second.

But does that fall back under the question we had about keeping the main thing,

the main thing, and focusing on what's important majoring in the miners?

How do we, I guess, I mean, what should we say for those of us who have no problem reading ESV,

NLT, NIV, and for those of us who are fine with that, how do we interact with those who say,

know what's King James' version only?

And it's not just because it was good enough for Jesus, but it's, you know, the arguments that are made

are very, they're very logical arguments about, you know, the manuscripts that were used for,

for the translation of the King James version.

They were the authentic ones, and yes, there's been older stuff discovered since then,

but those are corrupt in some ways.

I mean, what's the way for us, those of us who aren't bound to the King James version to deal with somebody who's,

who's hung up on it, so I don't want to say, I don't, that sounds kind of offensive,

but they're a proponent of King James version only, and everything else is just as bad.

I guess the first question I have is like, are they making it a major,

or is it just something they believe where they go, you know, you could tell they feel uncomfortable,

but they're still going to fellowship with you, they're not going to like interrupt your Bible study,

they're not going to walk out of your church, they're not going to fire you if you're on staff,

and you're like, you know, I walked into my fellowship one time carrying an ESV Bible,

...