Why was the NT Zacharias "struck dumb"?

Author: Stephen

Posts

Total: 137
PGA2.0
PGA2.0's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 3,179
3
5
8
PGA2.0's avatar
PGA2.0
3
5
8
-->
@Stephen

so what, - ME


in the light of all of these other cases of biblical characters " doubting", do you not see the unfairness of
Zacheras' punishment? Do you not see the bias?  Do you not see the over reaction to what was a simple enquiry? Do you not see that compared to these other occasions of people doubting, how ridiculous the whole story is? - YOU

No, I do not see any unfairness. Who are you to question God's "fairness?" How does a relative, subjective human being come up with fairness without an absolute, objective, unchanging reference point? Again, who are you to judge God as overreaching?

When you say doubting, often the punishment is related to a flat out denial of God, but not with true believers. 

There was a reason for Zacharias' muteness. It was 1) a lesson to Zacharias, 2) it confirmed the message of the angel as being from God. 

therefore it is reasonable to believe God was gracious to him, - ME


Yes, That is all you are left with isn't it. You cannot explain away this disgraceful behaviour by god towards his faithful servant Zacharias who was "righteous before his God, walking in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord" and was  "blameless"  in the eyes of his god..

The story is a pack of lies and is beyond doubt, a cover story for something more sinister . Zacharias was told to keep his mouth shut " struck dumb" and his wife was ordered to hide herself away. - YOU


Explain it away? I'm not trying to explain away his behavior. I'm explaining the justification for his behavior and the judgment of God. God used this doubt to confirm His message as true. 

You keep putting the "story" down as a pack of lies BECAUSE you are an unbeliever. It does not help your purpose in your rebellion towards God, to admit to its truthfulness. If you admitted that God's word is true you would be in a dilemma that you are not willing to face. That dilemma is hat you have sinned before God and are accountable. If you deny Him you think it lets you off the hook.


And if you knew your scripture better, you would understand that the Old Testament story of  Abraham's first born by his Egyptian  Servant would 'fit' the story of the Baptist more closely.  - YOU


Please explain your reason for this statement. I'm not sure what you are getting at? I will be willing to put my knowledge of John the Baptist up against yours. The Bible will be our test. If you convince me then I will admit you have a good case in this particular statement. 

If you want, we can carry this discussion on further on your John the Baptist thread claims. 
PGA2.0
PGA2.0's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 3,179
3
5
8
PGA2.0's avatar
PGA2.0
3
5
8
-->
@disgusted
And you claim that this myth can speak without a larynx. That's not possible and so you must be lying. Explain how your invisible friend SPEAKS.

I claim no such thing as myth, so please don't put words in my mouth. 

Please do not deform my character either by calling me a liar because your worldview does not agree with mine. I have offered to give you ample evidence that you can dispute and we will see who has the more reasonable and logical case. So far, you have done what most unbelievers do, you have maligned my character and not been willing to engage in the discussion. It is all a deflection to avoid doing so. I've been playing this unbeliever game of avoidance and assertions for decades on these forums. 

If you were serious in proving me wrong I don't understand what you have to lose? Let the truth come out, one way or the other. 

Over and over, like a broken record, I hear the unbelieve say, "There is no EVIDENCE for Christianity. It is all a MYTH." Yet, when I issue the challenge most run and hide for the reason that they have insufficient knowledge of the Bible and the evidence it offers, specifically through prophecy. 

Where do you know of anyone who can predict with 100% accuracy things that will come to pass before they happen? That is the issue of prophecy and all I ask is that the unbeliever put his charges, with evidence, against my charges, as see who has the more reasonable and logical argument. 

Are you willing to do that, or am I wasting my time in a dialog? This cat and mouse game is unproductive. Show your evidence or do not speak about things you know little about.   

PGA2.0
PGA2.0's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 3,179
3
5
8
PGA2.0's avatar
PGA2.0
3
5
8
-->
@Stephen
A challenge for you:


PGA2.0
PGA2.0's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 3,179
3
5
8
PGA2.0's avatar
PGA2.0
3
5
8
-->
@Stephen
 
Show me where the text states that Thomas doubted Jesus was the Messiah. Where is it stated? - ME
 
 Read what I wrote slowly and stop putting words into my mouth. 
 
Here is what I wrote>> - YOU
 
He had no faith that the lord his god Jesus had risen or it appears, in the resurrection. - YOU
 
In other words my friend, that is to say,  to doubt someone has risen from the dead, would by default be to doubt someone had been resurrected. or had resurrected. - YOU
What I get from your posts is that you seem to imply that doubt of any kind is either a cardinal sin or should be punished. It can be a cardinal sin and I gave you an instance of it being so by those who reject or die doubting Jesus was/is who He claimed to be. Doubt for a believer is covered by the Savior's blood. He died in the place of the true believer. Thus, the penalty that should have been ours is met by Him. He paid the price for our sins. Not only that, He lived the life before God we could never live. So He met God's righteous standard on behalf of the believer. That is a biblical teaching.   


Later Thomas' doubts were shown to be ill-founded. Jesus confirmed to Thomas what Thomas wanted to see. He believed and confessed that Jesus is Lord and that Jesus is God. His testimony is a witness to us today, that we may also believe. So, as in everything, God had a purpose for Thomas' doubt in the resurrection.

The other thing to note is that when we doubt we learn valuable lessons about the trustworthiness of God's word. It reveals a lack of faith when we doubt, but Jesus shields us from our small faith at times if we trust in Him. God is in the habit of proving men who doubt 1) have no good reason to doubt, and 2) are liars, for they impune God's word, His testimony, as a lie. Thus, God is able to show them, either in this life or on the flip side, the life to come, that what He says is true.

PGA2.0
PGA2.0's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 3,179
3
5
8
PGA2.0's avatar
PGA2.0
3
5
8
-->
@Stephen


in the light of all of these other cases of biblical characters " doubting", do you not see the unfairness of
Zacheras' punishment? Do you not see the bias?  Do you not see the over reaction to what was a simple enquiry? Do you not see that compared to these other occasions of people doubting, how ridiculous the whole story is?


There is sometimes a difference between doubt and disobedience. Doubts can be caused by lack of faith or lack of knowledge or both.

On a personal note, by being disobedient to God's word I have learned many valuable lessons, confirming that what He says is true. So often the punishment is the lifestyle we lead for disobedience. It is not blessed and it causes many problems that those who are righteous do not face. 

Funny thing too, a friend of mine was a "charismatic" Christian who believed in "name it and claim it" theology. The reason he said that we, as Christians were not the "richest" people in the world, or could not "heal the sick" and "raise the dead," was because of a lack of faith, or a small faith. Through Scripture, I later proved to myself that what he said did not line up with God's word. The gifts of healing, prophecy, and so on, were gifts for the establishment of the early church and ended in AD 70.

To my knowledge, he is still under this delusion since I haven't seen him in well over ten years. But I heard his lifestyle and the fanatical pursuit of healing and speaking in tongues was possibly the cause of his marriage break-up. I challenged him on a number of occasions to go to the local hospital and heal everyone in it as proof of what he was saying. The hypocrisy of the whole situation was he was telling me what I should be able to do yet he could not demonstrate that he had the ability to do so either, although he claimed he had. This taught me a valuable lesson about God's word. That is to establish the truth of the matter through His word, not by what people tell you. His word is capable when rightly discerned, of showing the correct interpretation. 

Peter
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,353
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@Stephen
You are getting sick of me disagreeing with you. But you are clearly wrong. You selectively read Zechariah's account and interpret it to mean no unfaithfulness and then suggest that the angel who was there at the time was wrong when he said that Zechariah disbelieved him. 

Cant you see the difficulty of your point? No I don't suppose you can. This is not a matter of you making a point - go ahead and do it. It is a matter of proving your point -which you clearly have not done so. Otherwise everyone would agree with you. 

My other views on the touching and clinging too are solid and based in good grounded rhetoric - your view has been soundly refuted as ignorant and self serving. 
disgusted
disgusted's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,959
2
3
3
disgusted's avatar
disgusted
2
3
3
-->
@PGA2.0

I claim no such thing as myth, so please don't put words in my mouth. 
No one said you did. Get a grip.

Please do not deform my character either by calling me a liar because your worldview does not agree with mine. I have offered to give you ample evidence that you can dispute and we will see who has the more reasonable and logical case. So far, you have done what most unbelievers do, you have maligned my character and not been willing to engage in the discussion. It is all a deflection to avoid doing so. I've been playing this unbeliever game of avoidance and assertions for decades on these forums. 
It's godists like you who make assertions and then squirm around trying to change the subject. Does your mythical creature possess a larynx?

If you were serious in proving me wrong I don't understand what you have to lose? Let the truth come out, one way or the other. 

Yeah so answer the question instead of running away, try a little truth.

Where do you know of anyone who can predict with 100% accuracy things that will come to pass before they happen? That is the issue of prophecy and all I ask is that the unbeliever put his charges, with evidence, against my charges, as see who has the more reasonable and logical argument. 
Nobody can and nobody ever has, now get back on topic.
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,345
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Tradesecret
You are getting sick of medisagreeing with you.
 
No .  you can disagree with me all day long. I am getting sick of repeating myself and showing you what the verse clearly states and of you continuing this circular disagreement, by telling me it was not a punishment.
 
 
 But you are clearly wrong.
 
According to you.
 
 
You selectively read Zechariah's account and interpret it to mean no unfaithfulness and then suggest that the angel who was there at the time was wrong when he said that Zechariah Disbelieved him. 
 
Stop it!  I have shown the story IN FULL.  The verse makes it clear. It was a punishment. I have not deviated from that verse. I believe that, it is written, it shows that this faithful servant of god ,  Zacharias, is being punished. What do you read it as if not a punishment? This is what I am getting sick of. You denying it was a punishment , the angel states “because you have doubted” .
 
Cant you see the difficulty of yourpoint?
 I can. It is a undeserved punishment IF that story is true.
 
My other views on the touching andclinging too are solid and based in good grounded rhetoric.
 
  There is absolutely no reason to believe Mary  had even touched Jesus or as you translate “clung to him” BEFORE he told her not to touch him.  
 - your view has been soundly refuted asignorant and self serving. 
 
Only in YOUR blinkered opinion.   You have simply tried to explain away these anomalous verses with YOUR interpretation and or a  omnipotent being you call god. 
I have stated already I believe this story is a cover story for something more sinister. I believe  Zaharias was told to keep his mouth shut and that his wife ordered  to hide herself away until the appropriate time. 
 

ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@Stephen
PGA 2.0 - Post #72

Gabriel makes known to Zacharias that to doubt what he says as a certainty is to doubt God, therefore, to confirm the message is from God Gabriel gives Zacharias a sign to confirm to him: "I am Gabriel, who stands in the presence of God, and I have been sent to speak to you....you shall be silent...because you did not BELIEVE my words..
No matter how obtuse you pretend to be, scriptures show you to be ignorant. We all see it.
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,345
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@ethang5
PGA 2.0 - Post #72

Gabriel makes known to Zacharias that to doubt what he says as a certainty is to doubt God, therefore, to confirm the message is from God Gabriel gives Zacharias a sign to confirm to him: "I am Gabriel, who stands in the presence of God, and I have been sent to speak to you....you shall be silent...because you did not BELIEVE my words..
No matter how obtuse you pretend to be, scriptures show you to be ignorant. We all see it.
Which was his  punishment for NOT BELIEVING was to be struck "dumb". Yew "WE" do all see it.

And, behold, thou shalt be dumb, and not able to speak, until the day that these things shall be performed, because thou believest not my words, Luke 1:20 


ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@Stephen
And yet you said he did not doubt. You said there was no indication in the passage that he doubted. You were wrong.

Yo called it a punishment. We asked you, "so what?" You couldn't answer. You said he should not have been punished, placing your judgement above that of God.

You insisted God did not strike Abraham dumb. We asked you, "so what?" You could not answer. We asked you, "Why did God have to behave the same way to two different people at different times?" You could not answer.

But you simply continue with your illogical argument that has been debunked. You refuse logical answers offered to you, and pretend you don't see the answers, but later (like now) will pretend the answer was your idea.

People began by thinking you were just ignorant, but many are now starting to think you are just dishonest. Is the emotional joy you feel from insulting God worth the loss of your reputation?
PGA2.0
PGA2.0's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 3,179
3
5
8
PGA2.0's avatar
PGA2.0
3
5
8
-->
@disgusted

I claim no such thing as myth, so please don't put words in my mouth. - ME

No one said you did. Get a grip. - disgusted

Your words:

"And you claim that this myth can speak without a larynx. That's not possible and so you must be lying." - Post  #116
Not only this, you called me a liar.

 
Please do not deform my character either by calling me a liar because your worldview does not agree with mine. I have offered to give you ample evidence that you can dispute and we will see who has the more reasonable and logical case. So far, you have done what most unbelievers do, you have maligned my character and not been willing to engage in the discussion. It is all a deflection to avoid doing so. I've been playing this unbeliever game of avoidance and assertions for decades on these forums. - ME

It's godists like you who make assertions and then squirm around trying to change the subject. Does your mythical creature possess a larynx?
- disgusted
I did not change the subject. I answered your questions. I explained to you that God does not have a corporal body, He is not physical, but spiritual. Words that are Anthropomorphic are words God uses to relate to us, that we may relate to God. 

I'm not asserting, I am conveying a biblical teaching. You are the one asserting a mythical being. Prove God is mythical. You can't - you can only assert it. Now let's look at the evidence that supports the Bible and test its reasonableness. https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/399?page=1&post_number=1

Where do you know of anyone who can predict with 100% accuracy things that will come to pass before they happen? That is the issue of prophecy and all I ask is that the unbeliever put his charges, with evidence, against my charges, as see who has the more reasonable and logical argument. - ME

Nobody can and nobody ever has, now get back on topic. - disgusted
Prove your assertion is reasonable by going to the thread link given above.
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,345
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@ethang5
And yet you said he did not doubt. You said there was no indication in the passage that he doubted. You were wrong.
Yes I did, And there isn't.  He simply asked a question, you and the angle say he doubted. and for this perceived doubt on the angels part, he was punished by being struck dumb.
Yo called it a punishment. We asked you, "so what?" You couldn't answer. 
It was a PUNISHMENT. An  unjust punishment even if he had doubted . I did answer your "so what" on many occasions, you just ignored my response.  SO HERE IT IS AGAIN.

If Zacharias, AND Sarah, And Thomas AND John the Baptist AND Jesus AND Simon Peter all doubted, why , were they not punished  or penalised by being struck "dumb"?   This is why the story makes absolutely no sense whatsoever UNLESS it is as I say, that Zacharias was ORDERED to stay silent and why his wife - who was supposed to have been barren - was told to hide herself away.

I am failing to see why you are so annoyed about this. It is glaring and bias. hypocrisy at it worst, if the story is to be taken at face value and as you believe it.


ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@Stephen
And yet you said he did not doubtYou said there was no indication in the passage that he doubted. You were wrong.

Yes I did, And there isn't.

The angel said he did Pinocchio. That was the indication.

 He simply asked a question, you and the angle say he doubted.
Exactly. Yet you accept the part of the bible's account that he asked a question, but not the part where the angel says he doubted. Illogical. If you can disregard any part of the account you want, your analysis becomes rubbish.

The telling part is, you have no rational for doubting the account of the angel saying he doubted. You just do, no logic, no reason. Just your loony ideas. You also have no reason for accepting the parts you do, you just accept them because they do not contradict your loony ideas.

and for this perceived doubt on the angels part, he was punished by being struck dumb.
Who was he punished by?

You called it a punishment. We asked you, "so what?" You couldn't answer. 

It was a PUNISHMENT.
So what?

An  unjust punishment even if he had doubted.
So your judgement disagrees with God. So what?

I did answer your "so what" on many occasions, you just ignored my response.  SO HERE IT IS AGAIN.
Your answer makes no sense unless we agree that your judgement supercedes God. Your judgement has no authority and is your personal opinion. It is rubbish.

If Zacharias, AND Sarah, And Thomas AND John the Baptist AND Jesus AND Simon Peter all doubted, why , were they not punished  or penalised by being struck "dumb"?
Sometimes they were. Sometimes we are not told if they were. But the question is impressively stupid. Their doubt was each different under different conditions. God does not need to do the same thing each time. When we ask you why do you stupidly assume God must react the same way to different situations, you can't answer.

This is why the story makes absolutely no sense whatsoever UNLESS it is as I say, that Zacharias was ORDERED to stay silent and why his wife - who was supposed to have been barren - was told to hide herself away.
The story makes no sense to you because you stupidly reject parts of the story for no logical reason, and assume God must act in an irrational way.

I am failing to see why you are so annoyed about this.
I am not annoyed at all. Telling you that your argument lacks logic is not anger. Telling you that it is stupid to reject the same passages you rely on as proof is not annoyance. Telling you that your imagination is not as authoritative as scripture is reasonable. Why do you think I'm annoyed? Because I point out you lack of logic?

It is glaring and bias. hypocrisy at it worst, if the story is to be taken at face value and as you believe it.
Why should we take your story on face value? Of course I am biased to God's version of the story. Your version not only lacks authority, it isn't even rational. I would be a complete idiot to give your version any respect.

And not as I believe it, as it clearly says. The angel, speaking for God, says Z doubted. Z is struck dumb, proving it was in fact God's judgement. You, Mr. Nobody, comes on to say, he did not doubt, and should not have been punished.

And we should go, "Oh yes! God was mistaken, and you are right Stephen. God is wrong."

If that is what you expect, you aren't just deluded, you are legally insane.
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,345
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@ethang5
The angel said he didPinocchio. That was the indication.
 
 We disagree. So what. I have put my case. You do not have to take my word for it. Grow up you silly little man.
 
 Yet you accept the part of the bible's account that he asked a question, but not the part where the angel says he doubted. 
 
 
It was a question that I  see no doubt in it . Simple , get over it.
 
Who was he punished by?

The story makes it appear that god or this angle punished him by striking  him dumb . Get over it. It was his punishment for the perceived “so called "doubting”.Get over yourself.

You called it a punishment. We asked you, "so what?" You couldn't answer. 
 
See above. I have answered that question a few times now. And you simply cannot cope with my response and neither have you bothered to answer or respond. Get over it.
 
So what?
 
Here is it is for at least the billionth time.
 
If Zacharias, AND Sarah, And Thomas AND John the Baptist AND Jesus AND Simon Peter all doubted,why , were they not punished  or penalised by being struck"dumb"?   This is why the story makes absolutely no sense whatsoever UNLESS it is as I say, that Zacharias was ORDERED to stay silent and why his wife - who was supposed to have been barren - was told to hide herself away.
So your judgement disagrees with God. So what?
It shows your so called god to be a vengeful hypocrite. It seems to be bothering you than it does me. I posed a question. You responded. Your response was absolute nonsense. You don’t agree. I can get over it.
 
Sometimes they were.[punished]
 
Show me where and when a single one of those I have mentioned ever gets punished for "doubting". Or are you just lying ... again.
 
I am not annoyed at all.
 
Good , Then get over yourself you self righteous  buffoon.
 
Why should we takeyour story on face value?
 
I haven’t asked you orany “WE” to believe what I wrote or believe or even to listen to my personalopinions. You have yours and I have mine. Take it or leave it. It is thatsimple. Get over it and yourself.
I would be a completeidiot to give your version any respect.
 
Then don’t. I am notforcing to am I.
 
You, Mr. Nobody, comeson to say, he did not doubt, and should not have been punished.
 
That is correct. I ama mister nobody as you are you. And correct again, I say he shouldn’t have beenpunished in the light of those other biblical revelations that shows otherbiblical characters “doubting” without punishment. I think that is a fair statement.You are not forced to accept it. Get over it.
And we should go,"Oh yes! God was mistaken, and you are right Stephen. God is wrong."
 
Stop being so silly. Howchildish. I have made it clear I am not trying to force anyone to agree withme.  I DON’T CARE IF YOU DON’T BELIEVE ME.  I am simply showing these biblical anomalies,that you don’t like.
 
If that is what youexpect,
 
IT IS NOT. I HAVE SAIDI DON’T CARE what you believe. I AM HIGHLIGHTING THINGS THAT YOU DON’T LIKE. AndI am not sorry about it.

Are you sure you are not annoyed. You seem like you are very annoyed, to me, ethang5.

ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@Stephen
Are you sure you are not annoyed. You seem like you are very annoyed, to me, ethang5.
I'm not the one using vulgarities and capital letters and exclamation marks.

We disagree.
Doesn't matter. The passage says he doubted. What you say is incorrect.

It was a question that I  see no doubt in it .
God did. So your opinion is nonsense, based on nothing.

Who was he punished by? 

The story makes it appear that god or this angle punished him by striking  him dumb .
It was God genius. You are wrong.

You called it a punishment. We asked you, "so what?" You couldn't answer. 
 
See above. I have answered that question a few times now. 
Saying he shouldn't have been punished does not answer so what? You don't think he should be punished. So what?

....why , were they not punished  or penalised by being struck"dumb"?
Why should they have been? Can't answer? God is not a machine. Not an algorithm. When you can answer why God should have behaved like an idiot, let us know.

Show me where and when a single one of those I have mentioned ever gets punished for "doubting".
Why should I show you something so stupid? God did not need to behave like a robot. 

I am not annoyed at all.
 
Good , Then get over yourself you self righteous  buffoon.
Lol. No, you're not annoyed at all.

Take it or leave it. It is thatsimple. 
Yet you keep posting the nonsense.

Why should we take your story on face value?
I haven’t asked you orany “WE” to believe what I wrote or believe or even to listen to my personalopinions. 

But if we don't believe, you say...

It is glaring and bias. hypocrisy at it worst, if the story is to be taken at face value and as you believe it.
Hypocrite much?

I would be a complete idiot to give your version any respect.
 
Then don’t. I am not forcing to am I.
Yes you are. You insult and throw a tantrum if you aren't believed.

You, Mr. Nobody, comes on to say, he did not doubt, and should not have been punished.
That is correct. 
We believe God's version, no matter how you spit and fume, no matter how much you insult. He did doubt because God says he did. God knows. You don't.

I have made it clear I am not trying to force anyone to agree withme.  
No, you only throw a tantrum, become vulgar, and start typing in caps showing everyone that you're crass and annoyed.

 I DON’T CARE IF YOU DON’T BELIEVE ME.
Is that why you're screaming? Because you don't care? Ooo k.

The angel, speaking for God, says Z doubted. Z is struck dumb, proving it was in fact God's judgement. You, Mr. Nobody, comes on to say, he did not doubt, and should not have been punished.

And we should go, "Oh yes! God was mistaken, and you are right Stephen. God is wrong."

If that is what you expect, you aren't just deluded, you are legally insane.
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,345
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
I'm not the one using vulgarities and capital letters and exclamation marks.

I have not used one single "vulgarity" , but you keep calling me silly childish names. How old are you exactly . 6?

 I use bold at times for emphasis. a point that you continually avoid. and that goes clean over your head.is not a crime and I haven't broken any rules, get over it.
And exclamation marks are for the correct use of the English language when pressing home what should be be an obvious a point,but totally wasted on you. It is not a crime and I haven't broken any rules, get over it.

 If is all you are going to do is disagree with my opinion, you have made your point. You disagree, so what , I don't care, whoopi do, never mind, there there. Mind how you go. Grow up.