When we hear repentance discussed within The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, it’s often connected to the idea of sin, specifically the acts of renouncing past sins and paying retribution for them.
The Gospel Principles manual, as an example, states that “repentance is the way provided for us to become free from our sins and receive forgiveness for them.” It goes on to outline 5 steps of the repentance process: admission, affliction, renunciation, confession, and restitution.
And when seen from this perspective, it can be easy to conclude that Jesus, who “did no sin” (1 Pet. 2:22), had no need for repentance.
But what if we’re looking at repentance wrong?
I mean, surely repentance does entail—at least to some degree—retribution and renouncement. But it is also much more.
For example, Dale Renlund said that “repentance also includes a turning of our heart and will to God”. The Standards for Youth manual offers a parallel exposition: “It is a change of mind and heart.”
In the New Testament, the word repentance is often translated from the Greek ???????? (metanoia), a combination of meta, meaning something like “after” or “with”, and noeo, meaning something like “to perceive” or “to think”. In its compound form, then, metanoia means something like “to think differently after”.
And that’s the meaning I want to focus on.
We often view repentance as a series of steps—which I summarized above—that gets us away from sin and toward righteousness, perfection (or sinlessness) even. But I think that perspective is flawed.
See, those 5 steps aren’t the foundation of repentance—they are byproducts of repentance.
When we focus on admitting our sins, suffering for them, renouncing and confessing them, and paying restitution for them, our intentions are misguided.
What we should focus on instead is seeking that true change of mind, or what Alma the Younger referred to as becoming “new creatures”. When we do, the admission, affliction, renunciation, confession, and restitution come naturally.
So, admission, affliction, renunciation, confession, and restitution aren’t repentance per se but rather a result of repentance.
And if repentance is less about renunciation and restitution and more about changing and becoming, then did Jesus repent?
I propose that he did.
For example, Luke 2:52 tells us that “Jesus increased in wisdom and stature, and in favour with God and man”.
D&C 93 says that the fullness of grace and truth Jesus was known for was not inherent to him, rather it was something he acquired over time, receiving “grace to grace, until he received a fullness”.
At some point between when he gave the Sermon on the Mount and when he gave the Sermon at Bountiful, he became perfected. In the former, he counselled us to become perfect, as the father is. In the latter, he likewise counselled us to become perfect, but as he himself is.
Jesus changed.
We know little of what he was like when he was younger, but we know he was different from the type of person he was during his ministry. He became a new person.
And even though we know that he did receive a fullness of glory and truth, we don’t know when he did.
At some point, he forsook whatever life he had been living—however humble or temporal or contemporary—and embarked on a new one, sparked by baptism and internal cleansing.
If we truly want to maximize the benefits of repentance, perhaps we should follow the example of the master repenter.
