According to Davo’s recommended web site on pantelism, the Cross alone was NOT enough for mankind’s complete redemption:
So, the idea is that the blood of Jesus, provided by being killed by an angry God, PLUS the blood of all the Jews in Jerusalem, killed by an angry Jesus at his Second Coming in 70 AD, were BOTH necessary for mankind’s full redemption.
But please consider the “Christus Victor” theory of the atonement, which proposes that,
So, rather than an offended God killing Jesus at the cross (through Roman soldiers), plus a disrespected Jesus killing all the Jews in Jerusalem (and destroying their law and their temple, through Roman soldiers), in order to redeem mankind; in actuality, the Trinity is nonviolent, and would never kill anyone; rather, Satan killed Jesus, a willing sacrifice, as per Christus Victor.
Further, in harmony with Christus Victor, consider that Jesus, our kinsman-redeemer, has graciously paid the debt price of this land himself. As per the discussion in Jeremiah 32, a kinsman could buy back land lost by the owner to an outside party, by himself paying the purchase price. The sealed book could then be delivered to the original owner, or to the heir. The heir could, at his convenience, break the seals, and, with the open scroll as his authority, take possession of the land—by force, if necessary.
As with all theological debates, the position we choose on any given issue is based on our belief about the true nature of God. I can now honestly say that, “God is good, all the time.” That He is exclusively about abundant life and love. And that love would never kill people, or torture them, or curse them. I encourage you to follow your heart about this “too good to be true” viewpoint, and …let your head catch up later.
Shalom.