Why Didn't God Leave Huge Quantities of Secular Evidence For Jesus?

[Skywalker]

You know you are making stuff up now. It's painfully obvious. You haven't read the scriptures of any other savior god and know nothing about how the followers thought of them.
We do know Krishna, another son of a God speaks the same to followers about love:

"However, we find a very different and more loving God in the Vedic tradition in the form of Lord Krishna. So, let us find out the nature of this more loving form of the Supreme Being.

Lord Krishna describes His ever-loving nature towards one and all, but especially for those who engage in loving Him. This is not favoritism but a natural reciprocation with those who are filled with loving feelings for Him. Lord Krishna explains Himself this way:

Krishna did not love his creation so much that he died for their sins. Jesus dying on the cross was the deepest expression of love for his creation. Jesus died because he wants all of his creation saved. He died so that anyone who repents and places their trust in Jesus can be saved, and even those who reject him, he still died for them. How does Krishna have that type of love for his creation?

 

[Skywalker]

Savior demigods are personal gods who get you into the afterlife. In Judaism you could not get to the good afterlife with all the "sin-force" weighing you down. So the Jewish savior had to be a sin-forgiving god. Every religion has differences. There may have been other sin-forgiving savior gods as well. Scriptures from other religions were destroyed, punishable by death and the vast majority of Mystery religion information was erased from Earth.

Jesus is a savior resurrecting God. A Hellenistic creation. Adapted to fit Judaism.

How was Baal a savior? Baal did not die a horrible death so we could be forgiven of our sins if we repent and place our trust in him. Jesus Vs Baal – Debunking The Alleged Parallels | Reasons for Jesus

By J.P. Holding| Baal is a figure known from the OT who is sometimes claimed to be another parallel for Christ. Let’s have a look at this — our source is Smith’s Origins of Biblical Monotheism[104ff].

Baal is sometimes reckoned as one of those “dying and rising gods” under Frazer’s outdated thesis. It should first be noted that the actual tablets describing Baal’s story do not actually preserve an account of Baal’s death and supposed return to life; that portion of the tablets are lost, and the events are inferred from remaining parts of the story.

In what we have left, Baal is discovered dead and given a burial; but later in the narrative, he reappears alive. In other works, if a certain verb is read as passive, it MAY refer to Baal as “brought to life,” but it may also be an active verb describing Baal as one who “brings to life.”

Secondarily, one of Baal’s daughters is named “Earthy” but the name MAY mean “Netherworldly.” And that is the sum and total of the evidence. In 70+ other texts about Baal, there is no mention of his death at all.

Anything like Christ? Not at all, and no more even on the surface than the naturally-expected theme of reversal of death as the ultimate bugaboo; no more an imitation of Christ than your latest zombie creature feature. Smith, seemingly with pagan-mythers in mind, writes: “…any attempt to render a reconstruction of Baal’s death and return to life should make no assumption about the nature of the latter.” [120]

After extended analysis Smith connects the story to the succession of the Ugaritic kingship, with Baal’s death representing the demise of the king and his return to life representing the role of the living king. [128]

A few claims have also circulated about an alleged “Passion” of Baal with details very close to that of the Passion of Jesus. A very helpful research associate has sent us copies of some material that deals in this issue and addresses the question.

In a 1921 edition of the Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, a scholar named H. Zimmern claimed a find of “stage-directions for a sort of miracle-play” performed at the temple of Bel-Marduk (i.e., Baal) annually. In this play, Baal was alleged to have been “bound and brought before the tribunal which awaits mankind on the bank of the river of death.” He was scourged, condemned to death, and then led away to a prison-house.

Another “malefactor was led also away to execution,” while a second one was released.

Once Baal was put in prison, “the city was plunged in confusion” and his clothes were stripped from his dead body. A goddess then washed away blood that had flowed from a “wound in the side” of Baal; and eventually he rose from the dead after his followers lamented. A parallel is also alleged in that Baal “descended into hell” and was welcomed by the other spirits.

Even on the surface, there are some problems here with a comparison to the Passion of Jesus. The “malefactors” would fit not the two thieves on the cross, but maybe one thief, and Barabbas; a third party is missing.

The “descent into hell” for Jesus is questionable, and we have noted above problems with an alleged death of Baal.

The problem is that this report by Zimmern was uncritically picked up by the Christ-myther G. R. S. Mead, who in his periodical The Quest, though he admitted the highly fragmentary nature of the text and considered it “perhaps foolhardy” to make comments, nevertheless creates two parallel columns in which he finds over a dozen parallels between Jesus and Baal based on this text.

Again, many comparisons do not fit; many more though are of the sort that would be found of ANY prisoner in the ancient world condemned to death (being led away; being tried before officials; being scourged – as part of the normal status degradation ritual; the dividing of clothes; the care for the dead).

 

[Skywalker]

Sure, a demigod, virgin born comes to save the world and get people into the afterlife and everyone gets to resurrect at the end of the world. That essence is the same.

No Greek or Roman God is described as a Savior. Zeus, Neither Zeus, Hercules, or Perseus are believed by their followers to have died for the sins of the world.

 

[Skywalker]

But many others were. Like Ra.


"Judaism was heavily influenced by Zoroastrianism, the religion of the Achaemenids.[27][8][28] Jewish conceptions of Satan were impacted by Angra Mainyu,[8][29] the Zoroastrian god of evil, darkness, and ignorance.[8] In the Septuagint, the Hebrew ha-Satan in Job and Zechariah is translated by the Greek word diabolos (slanderer), the same word in the Greek New Testament from which the English word "devil" is derived""

Egyptian gods were not born of virgins. Debunking The Jesus/Horus Connection | Reasons for Jesus

False claim #1: Horus is the son of the god Osiris, born to a virgin mother.
The mother of Horus was believed to be the goddess Isis. Her husband, the god Osiris, was killed by his enemy Seth, the god of the desert, and later dismembered. Isis managed to retrieve all of Osiris’s body parts except for his phallus, which was thrown into the Nile and eaten by catfish. (I’m not making this up). Isis used her goddess powers to temporarily resurrect Osiris and fashion a golden phallus. She was then impregnated, and Horus was conceived. However this story may be classified, it is not a virgin birth.

 

[Skywalker]

Yes, too bad the God of the Bible is so unfair. You make this too easy at times.




Satan in the Bible evolves throughout the stories.

The Old and New Testament gives different details about different topics, because Jesus expanded on topics that were mentioned in the Old Testament. Does the Bible teach that there would be two comings of the Messiah? | GotQuestions.org

The Old Testament clearly teaches that the Messiah would come, but it does not explicitly say that He would come twice. The information God revealed about the Messiah started very basic, with more detail added bit by bit. People living in later times knew more than those who lived earlier. Abraham knew more about the purposes of God than did Noah. David knew more than Abraham. The prophets knew more than David. And finally, the apostles in the New Testament knew more than the prophets. The apostles after the resurrection knew more than they did before the resurrection.

 

[whosetosay...]

Why didn't God leave behind a huge trove of secular evidence for Jesus having lived on earth, dying on the cross and all the supernatural events accompanying the crucifixion like dead bodies rising from the grave and walking around Jerusalem? If God really wanted us all to believe Jesus is His son who was born into this world for the sole purpose of dying for our sins--and that it was absolutely vital for us to believe Jesus died for our sins in order for God to keep from having to send us to hell for not believing in him, then wouldn't He have done everything in His power to leave behind secular evidence so overwhelming that only a fool or a madman would deny Jesus was divine? Wouldn't God have made sure that every historian in Jesus' time had heard of or witnessed Jesus' death and resurrection and ascension and then written about it? Wouldn't God have made sure that these accounts were perfectly preserved like Julius Caesar's Gallic Wars? Wouldn't God have made absolutely certain that the original gospel accounts from the apostles had been perfectly preserved for future generations so that we had first-hand testimony of what Jesus said and did?

Why instead did God allow whatever might have been written about Jesus by a known historian to be completely lost or destroyed? Why did 50-100 years have to transpire before someone finally decided to write the gospels, and these weren't even from eyewitnesses--they were Greek Christian scholars writing in perfect Koine Greek? And if they had no eyewitnesses or written testimonies to get their information from then how did they know the incredible minute details that appear in their accounts? How, for example did Luke know that an angel appeared to Jesus to comfort him in the Garden of Gethsemane when there were no witnesses to this miraculous event? Further, no manuscripts of any of the New Testament writings surface until the middle/late part of the 2nd Century. Why is that if God was divinely guiding the transmission of information about Jesus?

I can' seem to find answers for these questions that constantly pop into my mind. I lost my Christian faith because of the complete lack of evidence for Jesus outside the Bible.

Is Faith ever about copious amounts of evidence? Let me rephrase that. Is physical evidence the same as spiritual evidence?

Jesus taught in John 4 that true worshipers would worship in Spirit and Truth. The true Kingdom of God lies within.
Believers should be empowered to seek truth and it is in truth you worship God and know him. Faith is believing and then seeing. King James Bible
And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God:

The bible shows in Acts 5:1-11 that the disciples knew things they did not witness. The Holy Spirit was the power which came up on all the holy men of God. Faith is a living truth both in the bible and in the followers of Jesus. Man must be born of the truth about Christ and the Spirit of God the teacher. The bible is not required for those baptized with the Spirit. The Spirit of the LORD spoke by me, and His word was on my tongue. (2 Samuel 23:2)
KJV
Then he answered and spake unto me, saying, This is the word of the Lord unto Zerubbabel, saying, Not by might, nor by power, but by my spirit, saith the Lord of hosts.

Most of your questions could have been answered by a person of faith who worship God in Spirit and truth.
Then you can always answer your own questions by asking God himself. This is things found within the bible and I was surprised you had no knowledge of these things.

 

[SeekingAllTruth]

Is Faith ever about copious amounts of evidence? Let me rephrase that. Is physical evidence the same as spiritual evidence?

Jesus taught in John 4 that true worshipers would worship in Spirit and Truth. The true Kingdom of God lies within.
Believers should be empowered to seek truth and it is in truth you worship God and know him. Faith is believing and then seeing. King James Bible
And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God:

The bible shows in Acts 5:1-11 that the disciples knew things they did not witness. The Holy Spirit was the power which came up on all the holy men of God. Faith is a living truth both in the bible and in the followers of Jesus. Man must be born of the truth about Christ and the Spirit of God the teacher. The bible is not required for those baptized with the Spirit. The Spirit of the LORD spoke by me, and His word was on my tongue. (2 Samuel 23:2)
KJV
Then he answered and spake unto me, saying, This is the word of the Lord unto Zerubbabel, saying, Not by might, nor by power, but by my spirit, saith the Lord of hosts.

Most of your questions could have been answered by a person of faith who worship God in Spirit and truth.
Then you can always answer your own questions by asking God himself. This is things found within the bible and I was surprised you had no knowledge of these things.

I'll explain again: the church invented the idea that the just shall live by faith. Why? Because the church didn't have a dime's worth of evidence anything about Jesus was true. In absence of any proof they could offer (and believe me they'd love a treasure trove of evidence if any existed) all they could say was, "I can't prove what I'm telling you, you just have to take my word for it." Would you buy a used car from someone who told you that?

 

[Skywalker]

I'll explain again: the church invented the idea that the just shall live by faith. Why? Because the church didn't have a dime's worth of evidence anything about Jesus was true. In absence of any proof they could offer (and believe me they'd love a treasure trove of evidence if any existed) all they could say was, "I can't prove what I'm telling you, you just have to take my word for it." Would you buy a used car from someone who told you that?

The teachings of the church have nothing to do with the teachings of Jesus. Regardless of what the church teaches, how can we be good enough to be accepted by God without the atonement of Jesus?

 

[whosetosay...]

I'll explain again: the church invented the idea that the just shall live by faith. Why? Because the church didn't have a dime's worth of evidence anything about Jesus was true. In absence of any proof they could offer (and believe me they'd love a treasure trove of evidence if any existed) all they could say was, "I can't prove what I'm telling you, you just have to take my word for it." Would you buy a used car from someone who told you that?

This is opinion it does not contain anything factually or with which you could attack the gates of heaven with.
You see the true Church is not a building it is a living body. There is no such thing as "I can't prove what I'm telling you, you just have to take my word for it." The truth of the bible shows that if you truly believe and do as it says you know the truth and God and Jesus will reveal themselves to you. Like the seed and where it fell the falling away is explained.
It is those who believe and persist till they bear fruit which grow healthy to maturity according to the bible.

 

[SeekingAllTruth]

This is opinion it does not contain anything factually or with which you could attack the gates of heaven with.
You see the true Church is not a building it is a living body. There is no such thing as "I can't prove what I'm telling you, you just have to take my word for it." The truth of the bible shows that if you truly believe and do as it says you know the truth and God and Jesus will reveal themselves to you. Like the seed and where it fell the falling away is explained.
It is those who believe and persist till they bear fruit which grow healthy to maturity according to the bible.

I was a Christian for 60 years. I never heard "Boo" from God. I read the Bible I tried to follow God's laws. I prayed giving God praise AND asking for intercessory prayer on occasions. None of my prayers were answered. I looked around and saw the same thing happening to millions of other Christians. The only difference between you and them is that you're making a conscious decision to stick with it while millions of Christians are deciding it's all just a load of guff and walking away from Jesus. That isn't my opinion. It's reality.

"The coming end of Christian America"

"A bare 65 percent of Americans now say they're Christians, down from 78 percent as recently as 2007. the "nones" — have swelled from 16 to 26 percent over the same period.

The coming end of Christian America

 

[joelr]

Krishna did not love his creation so much that he died for their sins. Jesus dying on the cross was the deepest expression of love for his creation. Jesus died because he wants all of his creation saved. He died so that anyone who repents and places their trust in Jesus can be saved, and even those who reject him, he still died for them. How does Krishna have that type of love for his creation?

Again, you are making stuff up about religions you know nothing about. Hinduism has the same type of connection to it's followers through the love of a demigod:

"Krishna’s mercy is more powerful than all the most powerful tidal waves. So yes, Krishna wants us to be happy. His love is our only qualification, His causeless love. He descends into this world again and again and again to give kindness to those who have offended Him unlimited times. Krishna does not need anything from us. He just wants a genuine and pure expression of love and surrender. Why does He want it? For our sake. That’s all. Because He wants us to be ananda, happy."

Jesus was a savior deity. In Judaism they came up with the concept of original sin and ideas that one cannot get into an afterlife with too much "sin-force". So Jesus gets you into a heaven by erasing sins. All saviors get you into an afterlife by some process. Jesus is the Jewish version of the myth.
It doesn't automatically become true just because there is a Jewish spin on the myths.

If you studied Hinduism that Krishna is associated with you would find there is actually even more emphasis on love between followers and gods. They are less concerned with non-believers going to eternal fire and families being split by belief.

 

[joelr]

How was Baal a savior? Baal did not die a horrible death so we could be forgiven of our sins if we repent and place our trust in him. Jesus Vs Baal – Debunking The Alleged Parallels | Reasons for Jesus

It's like you are putting extra effort into being incorrect? Who said Baal was a savior? The real biblical historian in the article below explains Baal is not a personal savior god, just a resurrecting god?
Your article is debunking something that no one even claimed?

What's even better is the book that your source (he's a Library Sciences major) used to write his article is a book explaining that Yahweh is just one of the many mythical gods created around that time period!

He sources:
The Origins of Biblical Monotheism: Israel's Polytheistic Background and the Ugaritic Texts

As the Bible tells us, ancient Israel's neighbors worshipped a wide variety of Gods. It is now widely accepted that the Israelites’ God, Yahweh, must have originated as among these many, before assuming the role of the one true God of monotheism.

See, a myth.


What Carrier says on Baal:


Baal (or “Ba’al”) was one of the most ancient of resurrected gods. His death is probably the same mourned under the name Hadad-Rimmon in Zechariah 12:11. But whether or no, in pre-Christian texts Baal’s corpse is found by Anat, so in his myth the god is definitely dead; one text even outright says “and the gods will know that you are dead,” and multiple gods actually declare him dead; he is then buried, and funeral rites performed (Mettinger, Riddle, pp. 60-62). There are then clear references to Baal’s resurrection. In fact, his returning to life and then living forever are used as analogies in pre-Christian immortality spells (Mettinger, Riddle, pp. 69-71). Though this god was then not yet a personal savior but a metaphor for communal agricultural salvation, that was prior to Hellenization. He was transformed into one of the many personal savior gods of the region we hear of at the dawn of Christianity (Jupiter Dolichenus), but are allowed to know nothing about, owing to the Medieval Christian destruction of pagan evidence. For example, Hippolytus devoted two entire chapters of his Refutation of All Heresies to the mystery cults and their savior deities. Curiously, those are the only two books wholly destroyed. Go figure. What were the Medievals trying to hide? What did they not want us to read? I’ll let your imagination ponder.

 

[Skywalker]

I was a Christian for 60 years. I never heard "Boo" from God. I read the Bible I tried to follow God's laws. I prayed giving God praise AND asking for intercessory prayer on occasions. None of my prayers were answered. I looked around and saw the same thing happening to millions of other Christians. The only difference between you and them is that you're making a conscious decision to stick with it while millions of Christians are deciding it's all just a load of guff and walking away from Jesus. That isn't my opinion. It's reality.

"The coming end of Christian America"

"A bare 65 percent of Americans now say they're Christians, down from 78 percent as recently as 2007. the "nones" — have swelled from 16 to 26 percent over the same period.

The coming end of Christian America

The mistakes of the church have nothing to do with following Jesus. The church is not acting Christian at times because they are just human beings who make mistakes like everyone else.

 

[Skywalker]

It's like you are putting extra effort into being incorrect? Who said Baal was a savior? The real biblical historian in the article below explains Baal is not a personal savior god, just a resurrecting god?
Your article is debunking something that no one even claimed?

What's even better is the book that your source (he's a Library Sciences major) used to write his article is a book explaining that Yahweh is just one of the many mythical gods created around that time period!

He sources:
The Origins of Biblical Monotheism: Israel's Polytheistic Background and the Ugaritic Texts

As the Bible tells us, ancient Israel's neighbors worshipped a wide variety of Gods. It is now widely accepted that the Israelites’ God, Yahweh, must have originated as among these many, before assuming the role of the one true God of monotheism.

See, a myth.


What Carrier says on Baal:


Baal (or “Ba’al”) was one of the most ancient of resurrected gods. His death is probably the same mourned under the name Hadad-Rimmon in Zechariah 12:11. But whether or no, in pre-Christian texts Baal’s corpse is found by Anat, so in his myth the god is definitely dead; one text even outright says “and the gods will know that you are dead,” and multiple gods actually declare him dead; he is then buried, and funeral rites performed (Mettinger, Riddle, pp. 60-62). There are then clear references to Baal’s resurrection. In fact, his returning to life and then living forever are used as analogies in pre-Christian immortality spells (Mettinger, Riddle, pp. 69-71). Though this god was then not yet a personal savior but a metaphor for communal agricultural salvation, that was prior to Hellenization. He was transformed into one of the many personal savior gods of the region we hear of at the dawn of Christianity (Jupiter Dolichenus), but are allowed to know nothing about, owing to the Medieval Christian destruction of pagan evidence. For example, Hippolytus devoted two entire chapters of his Refutation of All Heresies to the mystery cults and their savior deities. Curiously, those are the only two books wholly destroyed. Go figure. What were the Medievals trying to hide? What did they not want us to read? I’ll let your imagination ponder.

Baal coming back to life had to do with the fertility cult that his religion was a part of. That has nothing to do with why the Bible says Jesus came back to life after he was crucified for our sins. ‘Why did Jesus die and rise again?’

The Bible tells us that Jesus died and rose again not only so that we could receive forgiveness, but even more so, He died and rose again so that we might have life. It is through His death and resurrection that we receive life. ... He died and rose again that we might live for Him - that's loving service.

 

[joelr]

No Greek or Roman God is described as a Savior. Zeus, Neither Zeus, Hercules, or Perseus are believed by their followers to have died for the sins of the world.

Savior deities were invented in Greece. It doesn't matter what word was used (you realize the word "savior" is an English translation?) but what they did for followers. Mainly they got them into an afterlife.
Just one example, Zalmoxis:

"His disciples then believed they would benefit from his power to bring them into eternal life in paradise."

Do you also realize that the entire concept of having a soul that can even live after death and go to an afterlife was started by Greek and Persian religions?

"The idea of the immortality of the soul is derived from Greek philosophy[34] and the idea of the resurrection of the dead is derived from Persian cosmology.[34] By the early first century AD, these two seemingly incompatible ideas were often conflated by Hebrew thinkers.[34] The Hebrews also inherited from the Persians, Greeks, and Romans the idea that the human soul originates in the divine realm and seeks to return there.[32] The idea that a human soul belongs in Heaven and that Earth is merely a temporary abode in which the soul is tested to prove its worthiness became increasingly popular during the Hellenistic period (323 – 31 BC).[29] Gradually, some Hebrews began to adopt the idea of Heaven as the eternal home of the righteous dead.["
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heaven

 

[Skywalker]

Again, you are making stuff up about religions you know nothing about. Hinduism has the same type of connection to it's followers through the love of a demigod:

"Krishna’s mercy is more powerful than all the most powerful tidal waves. So yes, Krishna wants us to be happy. His love is our only qualification, His causeless love. He descends into this world again and again and again to give kindness to those who have offended Him unlimited times. Krishna does not need anything from us. He just wants a genuine and pure expression of love and surrender. Why does He want it? For our sake. That’s all. Because He wants us to be ananda, happy."

Jesus was a savior deity. In Judaism they came up with the concept of original sin and ideas that one cannot get into an afterlife with too much "sin-force". So Jesus gets you into a heaven by erasing sins. All saviors get you into an afterlife by some process. Jesus is the Jewish version of the myth.
It doesn't automatically become true just because there is a Jewish spin on the myths.

If you studied Hinduism that Krishna is associated with you would find there is actually even more emphasis on love between followers and gods. They are less concerned with non-believers going to eternal fire and families being split by belief.

I believe that everyone has the same desire to follow Jesus but some people suppress it. Everyone knows that we need God's mercy and God is love and forgives, but that doesn't change that God is holy and just. The most fair judge is also a just judge.

 

[Skywalker]

Again, you are making stuff up about religions you know nothing about. Hinduism has the same type of connection to it's followers through the love of a demigod:

"Krishna’s mercy is more powerful than all the most powerful tidal waves. So yes, Krishna wants us to be happy. His love is our only qualification, His causeless love. He descends into this world again and again and again to give kindness to those who have offended Him unlimited times. Krishna does not need anything from us. He just wants a genuine and pure expression of love and surrender. Why does He want it? For our sake. That’s all. Because He wants us to be ananda, happy."

Jesus was a savior deity. In Judaism they came up with the concept of original sin and ideas that one cannot get into an afterlife with too much "sin-force". So Jesus gets you into a heaven by erasing sins. All saviors get you into an afterlife by some process. Jesus is the Jewish version of the myth.
It doesn't automatically become true just because there is a Jewish spin on the myths.

If you studied Hinduism that Krishna is associated with you would find there is actually even more emphasis on love between followers and gods. They are less concerned with non-believers going to eternal fire and families being split by belief.

How can we stand in the presence of God without accepting the free gift of salvation? The Case for Faith: Objection #6 | Satisfaction Through Christ

Dr. Moreland’s first point after his and Strobel’s introductory conversation is thatGod doesn’t torture people in hell. God has made us creatures with free will and if we continuously live without our creator’s purposes for us in mind, we will eventually get what we’ve asked for, which is separation from God. That is hell. He then states that God is not simply a loving being, especially if the meaning of “loving” is taken from current society’s meaning. “Yes, God is a compassionate being, but he’s also a just, moral, and pure being. So God’s decisions are not based on modern American sentimentalism. This is one of the reasons why people have never had a difficult time with the idea of hell until modern times. People today tend to care only for the softer virtues like love and tenderness, while they’ve forgotten the hard virtues of holiness, righteousness, and justice.”

Dr. Moreland continues to elaborate on the intrinsic nature of hell, which he says is relational in essence. “Actually, hell was not part of the original creation. Hell is God’s fall-back position. Hell is something God was forced to make because people chose to rebel against him and turn against what was best for them and the purpose for which they were created.” The punishment endured in hell is not that of torture but of separation from God, “bringing shame, anguish, and regret.” Although it is a just punishment, it is also “the natural consequence of a life that has been lived in a certain direction.”

 

[joelr]

Hell being literally fire is not mentioned in the Bible. Fire means the state of torment from being separated from God and the purpose that one was created for-to know God.

No, Jesus/gospel writers clearly believed in the demonology of the times and it included a devil and a hell.
Early church fathers even used Satan as an excuse for many centuries regarding why older religions also had characters similar to Jesus. They claimed Satan meddled with history to fool Christians.
Matthew 25:41 ESV /
“Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.

Revelation 20:14 ESV /
Then Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death, the lake of fire.

Mark 9:43 ESV /
And if your hand causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life crippled than with two hands to go to hell, to the unquenchable fire.

I understand most modern ideas about hell come from other sources like Dante. Neither here nor there. All stories and myths.

 

[Skywalker]

Again, you are making stuff up about religions you know nothing about. Hinduism has the same type of connection to it's followers through the love of a demigod:

"Krishna’s mercy is more powerful than all the most powerful tidal waves. So yes, Krishna wants us to be happy. His love is our only qualification, His causeless love. He descends into this world again and again and again to give kindness to those who have offended Him unlimited times. Krishna does not need anything from us. He just wants a genuine and pure expression of love and surrender. Why does He want it? For our sake. That’s all. Because He wants us to be ananda, happy."

Jesus was a savior deity. In Judaism they came up with the concept of original sin and ideas that one cannot get into an afterlife with too much "sin-force". So Jesus gets you into a heaven by erasing sins. All saviors get you into an afterlife by some process. Jesus is the Jewish version of the myth.
It doesn't automatically become true just because there is a Jewish spin on the myths.

If you studied Hinduism that Krishna is associated with you would find there is actually even more emphasis on love between followers and gods. They are less concerned with non-believers going to eternal fire and families being split by belief.

People sometimes make fun of their relatives for following Jesus. Jesus was referring to things like that exist. He wasn't promoting it. Did Jesus Come to Bring Peace or Division?

Context is everything, as they say. In Luke 12, Jesus is not making some broad statement about his ultimate purpose. Rather, he is pointing to a very real result of his kingdom proclamation. As Jesus announced the kingdom of God, calling for primary allegiance, this often split families, as some members believed and others did not. In fact, it’s quite possible that Jesus’ own family was severed because of his ministry, at least during his lifetime. So, even though the kingdom of God ultimately establishes God’s peace on earth, the advance of the kingdom brings division.

This unhappy truth does not, of course, imply that followers of Jesus are to seek conflict or to try to split up families. In fact, Jesus makes it clear that we are to be peacemakers and “to live in peace with each other” (Matt. 5:9; Mark 9:50). The Apostle Paul adds: “Do all that you can to live in peace with everyone” (Rom. 12:18). But making peace is not the same as making nice. Sometimes, our efforts to bring genuine peace to a situation or a relationship will, in fact, lead to conflict. Yet, we seek to serve God faithfully in such circumstances, knowing that, in the end, his genuine, lasting peace will pervade all creation.

 

[joelr]

I believe that everyone has the same desire to follow Jesus but some people suppress it. Everyone knows that we need God's mercy and God is love and forgives, but that doesn't change that God is holy and just. The most fair judge is also a just judge.

And a Hindu can say everyone has the secret desire to follow Lord Krishna. Your claims have no evidence.

Weird that you would say Yahweh is fair and just? Is it fair and just to kill everything living in 6 cities and in all others take women and children as "plunder".
I already know you will point to ridiculous apologetics like "they were all evil". Yeah, all the children were evil?
There even is modern scholarship on the Canaanites and guess what, not evil. Just normal farmers like the Israelites.
Sends a plague to kill 70,00, wow, so just. Were all those babies evil babies? Terrible myths. Luckily there is zero evidence for any of it being true.