Summary: Under the Plato-Dante framework the cross is a human sacrifice to pacify an angry God. Seen through the lens of the Kingdom of God, the cross is the triumph of God and the beginning of the New Creation.

Shownotes

In the opening chapter, I discussed how all of the pieces my faith have to work together. I can’t modify one part without affecting all the others. This really came home to me as I reflected on the cross. I realized that the way I viewed it was a result of embracing the Plato-Dante cosmology I no longer accept. Here is how the pieces used to fit together: 

I viewed the creation as three pieces: earth, heaven, and hell (my cosmology). Since only heaven and hell were eternal, earth did not matter. The only thing to concern myself with was getting into heaven when the earth was destroyed (my eschatology). The question became how to get a place in heaven (my soteriology) and what Christ had done to make this possible (my Christology). 

When I shifted my cosmology to a Kingdom cosmology, it changed everything. Here is how I now put the pieces together:

I view this world as “the heavens and the earth” with God standing outside of the created realm (my cosmology). I believe that God is actively healing and restoring this fallen world, making a “new heavens and earth” (my eschatology). The question becomes how to be included in this restoration (my soteriology) and what part Jesus plays in it (my Christology). 

The table below summarizes the shift in my thinking:

In this chapter, I will focus on the cross, beginning with my old way of looking at things, the Plato-Dante cosmology, and then showing how much better it is to see the cross through the lens of God’s Kingdom.  

The Cross in Plato-Dante Cosmology

In the Plato-Dante cosmology, the physical realm is a temporary phenomenon. Earth, as all matter, will be destroyed and replaced by the spiritual realms of heaven and hell. Every created thing will be assigned one or the other. Where do I belong? Well, I have done some good things and some bad things. I’m certainly not good enough to deserve heaven but I also don’t feel that my life merits eternal torture in hell. My life is an mix of good and evil but the afterlife offers only a place of pure good (heaven) or pure evil (hell). 

I grew up thinking I would wind up in hell since the slightest imperfection disqualified me from heaven. I heard this illustrated in a graphic way. If I had a sandwich and put just a tiny piece of shit in it would you eat it? In the same way, there may be some good pieces of me but that doesn't matter. God doesn’t eat shit sandwiches. Whatever good I have done is irrelevant. I have sinned. God has no option but to condemn me to hell. 

There is nothing I can do to fix this. Even if I lived a perfect life from here on out, I have already violated God's standard of perfection and earned my rightful place in eternal flames. My situation is hopeless. What will I do? That's where the cross comes in. Jesus lived a perfect life and was punished by God on the cross for every sin I have committed. Since Jesus paid the price for my sin, I am now regarded as perfect. I am now fit for heaven. 

What I have just described it's called the penal substitution theory of the cross. There is some truth in it but in many ways it is a logical necessity caused by the assumptions of Plato-Dante cosmology. When this is viewed as the only reason for the cross, it creates problems. Here are six.

Problems with The Cross in the Plato-Dante Framework

1. The gospel writers do not emphasize Jesus’ moral perfection. If the primary reason God sent Jesus to this earth was to be a perfect sacrifice, why didn't his first followers emphasize the fact that Jesus was morally perfect? Although it is logical that if Jesus was God incarnate he lived a moral...