Is Repentance Subjective?

When is repentance necessary? That's a question that came to my mind last night as I watched the film "Tape." The character John believed that he had committed a crime against Amy. Amy was asserting (right or wrong) that there had been no crime. When John tried to apologize, Amy wouldn't accept it on the basis that he had not been accused, therefore his apology wasn't necessary.
A big point was made in the dialogue of this movie that the perspective of each character helped to shape the actual event that occurred. "How would she describe it?" "I'm just wondering how you would describe it.." That sort of talk went on the whole movie. Also Amy pointing out that John's confession didn't actually prove that he had done anything wrong. If the crime itself is subject to interpretation, what about the repentance?

Could one say in their mind (rightly) that their crime had not hurt anyone but themselves and God, so they only owe repentance to those parties? Can we rightly believe that our actions only go so far? If Amy had truly forgotten about what had occurred (as John had rationalized) would his apology be truly not needed? Are we ever correct to assume that we know when to dish out repentance, and when to just "not do it next time?" Also, was Amy correct in saying that if John was truly repentant, he'd be willing to fully deal with the consequences?

I'm sure we've all done stuff. Is this movie trying to say that we have to go through our past and apologize to every single person for every single thing we've done, is that the point? I think it forces us to ask ourselves.. what is repentance and when is it necessary? I welcome all thoughts and comments...




by the way, I want to thank everyone who attended last night's showing. It was great to see you all and hear your thoughts. I look forward to the next one, which will definitely be Saturday, February 25th at 7 PM (movie rolls at 7:15)