Divine repentance, divine passion, and anthropomorphism

This paper (direct download link to PDF) succinctly lays out the challenges of biblical language related to (1) divine repentance, (2) divine emotion, and (most provocatively, 3) God's form (references to his eyes, hands, etc.). The author, Layton Talbert, joins a growing body of serious, conservative theologians who argue that we shouldn't be too quick to write off such references as accommodation or even anthropomorphism (or anthropopathism). 

The author doesn't discuss translation, but this certainly has implications for our work. First, if we can't be certain that all this language is simply metaphorical, then we can't easily substitute abstractions to clarify what the text really means (what does the text really mean other than what it actually says?). Second, if we strip out this sort of language, we prevent Christians who use our translation from ever engaging in conversations about the nature of God (what's to discuss? their translation says God's power is with us, not that his hand is with us) -- or at least, if they do engage, they have to stop using their mother tongue translations and switch to a translation in the language of wider communication -- something none of us want.

(The paper was part of a theological symposium and was posted at Theology in 3D.)