October 2, 2007

James L. Archibald II
Journal Entry 2 November 2007
2 November 2007 was the first full day the students spent at the Center since their trip to Jordan. Some students (including the author) spent their first hours of the day watching movies in the lounge or otherwise goofing off (this lasted until about 2:00am).
Breakfast was served mercifully late, though still too early for some sleepy-heads who managed to either miss it or return back to their beds right afterward. Some groups went to Tel Aviv, but most stayed in the international area of indeterminate status pending the resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict (at least, that’s what Kyler (the EQP) of the U.S. Consulate told us Jerusalem was).
After lunch about 40 students paid a whopping 14 shekels each for a trip to a park in West Jerusalem. Though the cost was surprisingly high, it managed to engender only mock consternation among the eager group. The plan was to play Ultimate Frisbee.
The issue of whether or not the students were allowed to wear shorts was a tricky one that most resolved by careful consideration of relevant precedents. The statute in question was the one that forbids students from wearing shorts anywhere except the gym (including while jogging). However, it was well-known (or at least widely-accepted) that Sister Galbraith had asked Dr. Kearl if she could wear shorts while playing tennis at the Hebrew U. Dr. Kearl replied that she could as long as she wore pants while travelling to and from the facility. Thus, the students had to decide whether the playing fields were sufficiently similar to the tennis courts at Hebrew U. (and therefore the gym) that the exception to the pants-only rule extended to them for the duration of their athletic activity. They must also have determined whether Sister Galbraith’s case was germane to theirs (Sister Galbraith is not a student). Additional considerations included their assessments of the weather, possible reactions of other park patrons and the decisions that other students made on the matter. Hopefully their decisions are never appealed.
The group split into two groups, one of whom played on a small, hilly field adjacent to a street. This field also featured such obstacles as holes in the ground and small children who would occasionally dart into the game. Despite this, the students still managed to play quite competitively. They were careful and none of the children was hurt, though Jessica Bringhurst did manage to find one of the holes and injure herself with it.
That night, some people went to Ophir Yarden’s synagogue. It was the first of many trips. The experience received uniformly positive reviews, though this author did not attend.
The final event of the day was the semester’s second Shalom-Shack-sponsored shindig. The theme was Halloween and all were required to concoct some kind of costume. The level of creativity and ingenuity displayed was quite impressive. The students, faculty and service couples also showed a remarkable spirit of camaraderie as they worked together to produce decent-looking costumes. Remarkably, the level of compliance with the rules was also extremely high (i.e. people wore shoes, modest clothing (no shorts) and didn’t remove any of their bedding from their rooms as far as this author knows). Many dressed in regional garb; while others impersonated other students or faculty members (James H. and Ryan T. impersonated one another with great success). Among this author’s favorite costumes was one that depicted the son of William Tell (Walter) complete with an apple affixed to the top of his head (full disclosure: this costume was produced and worn by the author). Other noticeable costumes were produced almost exclusively by persons whom this author kind-of likes in a way that he cannot express fully until leaving the Jerusalem Center. Practically everyone attended the party and no one reported having failed to have fun.
The party was typical of dance parties in warm rooms in that nearly everyone took occasional breaks from the heavy dance beats and body heat to stop sweating (full disclosure: maybe not everyone does this, but the author sure does). The music was better-played than the first Shalom-Shack Sha-Bang since the students used the Center’s speakers. Other activities for the night included taking pictures, dancing and eating stuff from the Shalom Shack, which provided complimentary bread and chocolate.
An Insight from the Old Testament
That the Old Testament is difficult to understand is quite cliché. The infrequency and superficiality of my study of the OT earlier in my life is such that it required a leap of faith to believe that the OT contained coherent writings at all outside its handful of well-known stories. To accept it as a divinely inspired work that belongs in the canon I relied as much on deductive reasoning and my testimony of modern prophets as I did on an actual belief in its substance. Subsequent failure to understand much of its message resulted in frustration and occasional hostility towards it, punctuated by occasional enlightenment that came as the result of sincere study. I wondered why the Lord, who speaks every language, who reveals things to men in their own tongues so they can understand, would insist that we use (and lug around) an imperfect translation of a book that was revealed to a people whose culture has very little to do with our own. Why burden us with documents we barely understand? Why talk about a legal code that seems so strange when viewed by modern eyes? Why talk of a history where the Lord seems so much meaner than He does in the other standard works? Why emphasize the legacy of a nation that was neither righteous most of the time nor particularly advanced relative to its neighbors in any secular discipline?
Though still much remains to be learned, I feel that I have matured in my view of the OT and have begun to genuinely feel the things that I knew only in an intellectual sense. During this class, it was confirmed to me to a greater extent than before that the Old Testament is consistent with the rest of the gospel and that the same God who dealt with His people in all the true dispensations dealt with the people of the Old Testament. I recall thinking about it one day close to the end of the course and realizing that all the most important aspects of man’s dealings with God are extremely clear in the Old Testament. This realization came like a list of questions: Is there any doubt about the importance of obedience to God? Does the Old Testament equivocate about the necessity of sacrifice? What about the importance of following the Prophet or of obeying the ordinances? Does it leave any doubt about the perils of living an unchaste life? Does it leave uncertainty about whether the Savior will come? Does it fail to delineate the singular role He plays in the plan? Does it deny the love that the Lord has for His people?
Clearly, the Old Testament is a book that belongs in the canon. Though my testimony of it is still weaker than that of the other standard works, I see now, more than ever, how the experiences and teachings that were directed to ancient Israel are relevant to me.