A Repentent God?

Christians are not the only "monotheists" who have trouble with thinking through the God concept. A recent  post in the Patheos' Jewish Portal serves as a pretty good example. Rabbi Shmuly Yanklowitz March 25th post, "A God That Repents", seems intent on offering a concise rational summary of the theological underpinning for the month of Elul. The problem does not stem from his explanation of why the month is focused on repentance but rather his attempt at connecting the concept of God to both tradition and more modern understanding of the world we live in.

The tagline he uses before getting into the actual piece says far more than he probably intended.
"If the world evolves then God evolves, as God is in relationship to a progressive universe and is affected by humans while the foundational Divine virtues remain the same."
It sounds nice. It evokes science and rationality without any messy details and even connects humans to God in terms that are easy to understand and latch onto. Too bad it is a contradiction both directly in its wording and in its more abstract meaning. In the first half of the sentence you have talk of change while the second half ends with, "remains the same." Even metaphorically this does not work. How can anything change and yet remain the same. Even small details when altered can have an impact. There is, of course, a problem with the very notion that God can change at all. If God is perfect what can God progress or evolve into? You can not be more perfect than perfect. If he changes it would have to be a change to imperfection which would be self-defeating.

The overall substance of his piece is equally problematic. By definition, or rather definitions, "God" cannot "Repent." Repentance is about seeking forgiveness for sin(s). This causes a number of contradictions that simply cannot be reconciled with the basic understanding of God. God cannot make a mistake or have anything resembling regrets. To do so would mean that God was imperfect and therefore not God, or at least, not the one true God. There is another important reason God cannot repent. God cannot sin. As I pointed out in a previous posting the basic definition of sin involves thoughts or actions that separate an individual from God. How do you separate yourself from yourself?

I'd say the Rabbi needs to rethink what he was trying to say or at least the manner in which he conveys it. As an atheist I have no use for repentance. I do, however, see the value in coming to terms with regrets and attempting to right past wrongs. I agree with a number of thing he talks about when it comes to strictly human interactions and relationships. The piece would have been far more meaningful without all the theological window dressing. No matter how desperately the rabbi wants his version of theological explanation to be profound it still comes off as gibberish. As intelligent and well intentioned as the piece is in humanistic terms it is still another blatant example of how religion can take otherwise excellent lessons and turn them into crap.