Why do skeptics question whether the Biblical Jesus Christ ever existed?

[shunyadragon]

Why do skeptics question whether the Biblical Jesus Christ ever existed?
04-20-2022, 01:01 PM

Historians general accept that Jesus was a real figure that lived during time the NT describes, a rabbi? that taught a Messianic message, claimed to be the Kig of the Jews, was condemned in Roman Court of Rebellion against Rome by claiming to be the King of the Jews, and was crucified under Roman Law. The question arises what about the Biblical Jesus Christ that skeptics seriously question ever existed. The life and records of Philo are a witness to this problem of the existence of the Biblical Jesus Christ.


Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/DebateAChr..._didnt_philo_of_alexandria_write_about_jesus/


Why didn't Philo of Alexandria write about Jesus or Christianity?

Philo of Alexandria was born: 25 BCE in Alexandria, Egypt. He died: 47-50 CE. He wrote an account of the Jews covering the entire time that Jesus is said to have existed on earth. He was living in or near Jerusalem when Jesus' miraculous birth and the Herodian massacre occurred. Philo spent time in Jerusalem where he had intimate connections with the royal house of Judaea. One of Alexander's sons (and Philo's nephews, Marcus) was married to Berenice, daughter of Herod Agrippa, tetrarch of Galilee and Peraea, 39-40. After the exile of Herod Antipas – villain of the Jesus saga – Marcus ruled as King of the Jews, 41-44 AD. But nothing from Philo on Jesus, the other 'King of the Jews'.

Philo was there when Jesus made his triumphal entry into Jerusalem. He was there when the crucifixion with an earthquake, daytime darkness, and resurrection of the dead 'saints' took place and when Jesus rose from the dead after 3 days. He was there when Jesus ascended into heaven. About thirty manuscripts and at least 850,000 words by Philo are extant. It was Philo who developed the doctrine of the Logos, or Word, and although Jesus, this Word incarnate, was walking around giving speeches and performing miracles, Philo wrote not one word about him or any of this.

© Copyright Original Source

 

[Audie]

Why do skeptics question whether the Biblical Jesus Christ ever existed?
04-20-2022, 01:01 PM

Historians general accept that Jesus was a real figure that lived during time the NT describes, a rabbi? that taught a Messianic message, claimed to be the Kig of the Jews, was condemned in Roman Court of Rebellion against Rome by claiming to be the King of the Jews, and was crucified under Roman Law. The question arises what about the Biblical Jesus Christ that skeptics seriously question ever existed. The life and records of Philo are a witness to this problem of the existence of the Biblical Jesus Christ.


Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/DebateAChr..._didnt_philo_of_alexandria_write_about_jesus/


Why didn't Philo of Alexandria write about Jesus or Christianity?

Philo of Alexandria was born: 25 BCE in Alexandria, Egypt. He died: 47-50 CE. He wrote an account of the Jews covering the entire time that Jesus is said to have existed on earth. He was living in or near Jerusalem when Jesus' miraculous birth and the Herodian massacre occurred. Philo spent time in Jerusalem where he had intimate connections with the royal house of Judaea. One of Alexander's sons (and Philo's nephews, Marcus) was married to Berenice, daughter of Herod Agrippa, tetrarch of Galilee and Peraea, 39-40. After the exile of Herod Antipas – villain of the Jesus saga – Marcus ruled as King of the Jews, 41-44 AD. But nothing from Philo on Jesus, the other 'King of the Jews'.

Philo was there when Jesus made his triumphal entry into Jerusalem. He was there when the crucifixion with an earthquake, daytime darkness, and resurrection of the dead 'saints' took place and when Jesus rose from the dead after 3 days. He was there when Jesus ascended into heaven. About thirty manuscripts and at least 850,000 words by Philo are extant. It was Philo who developed the doctrine of the Logos, or Word, and although Jesus, this Word incarnate, was walking around giving speeches and performing miracles, Philo wrote not one word about him or any of this.

© Copyright Original Source

Are you credulous or skeptical
about the three wise men

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

why-do-skeptics-question-whether-the-biblical-jesus-christ-ever-existed

Skeptics question everything, and believe nothing more than the quality and quantity of available supports. The evidence for a historical Jesus is scant, and as far as I know, consists only of words, most or all from people that never met the person they are writing about.

Two points: How much of the official story of Jesus can be shown to be wrong, and yet still, what remains can be called a historical Jesus? It's a version of the sorites paradox: how many parts of that story can be removed before it's not the guy written about? Suppose we remove all of the supernatural aspects - virgin birth, water into wine, resurrection. Is what's left a historical Jesus? Probably most people, including me, would say yes.

Now start removing more. Jesus was an orphan. There were only three disciples and two were women. Jesus had a wife and child. Jesus wasn't born in Nazareth. Is this still a historical Jesus? Would this account suffice to say that that is a historical Jesus if the rest of the story were accurate - Last Supper, Sermon on the Mount, crucifixion are historical events - even if the person giving them wasn't named Jesus? Is that a historical Jesus? If so, after how many more changes is it no longer a historical Jesus?

For the skeptic, the more important point is that it doesn't matter how much of the story was accurate if the supernatural parts are mythology. If nobody rose from the dead r was channeling a deity, it doesn't matter if the character is mostly historical or not. The words stand or fall on their own whatever their source. It's the same as if we discovered there was no historical Socrates. Maybe Plato wrote those words. So what? The words attributed to Socrates stand or fall on their intrinsic merit, not their alleged author.

So, this is a non-issue for skeptics. It doesn't matter if there were a historical Jesus, assuming that we can settle on what qualifies to be called that.

 

[shunyadragon]

Are you credulous or skeptical
about the three wise men

I am generally skeptical of the Biblical account as it is, and as reflected in the claims of Orthodox Christianity

Well, ah . . the three (number not specified in the gospels) is one of the unknowns of NT history. If as the known very limited historical information indicates, and the fact that Philos and other writers at the time did not leave a footnote for the existence of Jesus, than the three(?) wise men are likely another embellishment of the life of the Biblical Jesus Christ.

 

[Polymath257]

There is nothing inherently problematic about an itinerant preacher talking about the things Jesus was supposed to have said and that was put to death by Roman authorities.

In fact, we know of other examples where this happened.

That said, the lack of mention in other sources is suspicious, at least.

 

[wellwisher]

Why do skeptics question whether the Biblical Jesus Christ ever existed?
04-20-2022, 01:01 PM

Historians general accept that Jesus was a real figure that lived during time the NT describes, a rabbi? that taught a Messianic message, claimed to be the Kig of the Jews, was condemned in Roman Court of Rebellion against Rome by claiming to be the King of the Jews, and was crucified under Roman Law. The question arises what about the Biblical Jesus Christ that skeptics seriously question ever existed. The life and records of Philo are a witness to this problem of the existence of the Biblical Jesus Christ.


Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/DebateAChr..._didnt_philo_of_alexandria_write_about_jesus/


Why didn't Philo of Alexandria write about Jesus or Christianity?

Philo of Alexandria was born: 25 BCE in Alexandria, Egypt. He died: 47-50 CE. He wrote an account of the Jews covering the entire time that Jesus is said to have existed on earth. He was living in or near Jerusalem when Jesus' miraculous birth and the Herodian massacre occurred. Philo spent time in Jerusalem where he had intimate connections with the royal house of Judaea. One of Alexander's sons (and Philo's nephews, Marcus) was married to Berenice, daughter of Herod Agrippa, tetrarch of Galilee and Peraea, 39-40. After the exile of Herod Antipas – villain of the Jesus saga – Marcus ruled as King of the Jews, 41-44 AD. But nothing from Philo on Jesus, the other 'King of the Jews'.

Philo was there when Jesus made his triumphal entry into Jerusalem. He was there when the crucifixion with an earthquake, daytime darkness, and resurrection of the dead 'saints' took place and when Jesus rose from the dead after 3 days. He was there when Jesus ascended into heaven. About thirty manuscripts and at least 850,000 words by Philo are extant. It was Philo who developed the doctrine of the Logos, or Word, and although Jesus, this Word incarnate, was walking around giving speeches and performing miracles, Philo wrote not one word about him or any of this.

© Copyright Original Source

It had to do with the cancel culture at the time of Jesus. On Twitter, there are many people who are not allowed to speak, so for all practical purposes, the future will never know they existed. Try to find Donald Trump on Twitter. He no longer exists in the land of Twitter. You will need to go outside that safe space to know if he is still around.

The Early Christian religion was called the religion of the slaves. Slaves were very important to upkeep of the Roman lifestyle, and the idea of anyone teaching slaves to feel independent would get you canceled. Jesus also questioned law in favor of faith. Rome did not care if your God was different from their Gods, as long as you did not mess with the laws of Caesar and Rome. Christianity pushed the wrong buttons.

This mentality and the cancel strategy is why it took so long to compile the New Testament. For several centuries one would become a target with a bulls eye on your back. Any form of cruelty to you or yours would be acceptable. The records were purged of Jesus, with the hope this new religion would all go away. But it went underground and surface again after a few hundred years. By 400 years it became the official religion of Rome and would absorb Rome; Holy Roman Empire.

Those who deny the historical Jesus tend to use the cancel culture strategy. Censorship is part of that strategy. Religious freedom makes it hard to make laws to cancel religion, so it has to be done with tactics such as create doubt. They cannot compete in a fair fight, since nobody just flocks to these cults when free speech is allowed. They need to be the only show in town, so you have no other option.

When I first started to write on the net I wrote on various discussion forums in Physics and science. I was accepted until I defended someone who had a religious nature. Some of the members were quite cruel, so I stepped in to see if I could build a bridge between everyone. This good gesture put a target on my back and caused a group of Leftist jackals to gang up and attempt to cancel me; driver me away. They did not know who they were up against and did not have me stamina. In the end, they politicked and manipulated the staff to do their dirty work and cancel me. This may be why I stay in motion and don't pause at one topic too long. Although, religious people are very open to others. I like to move in a spiral; loop back later.

 

[shunyadragon]

It had to do with the cancel culture at the time of Jesus. On Twitter, there are many people who are not allowed to speak, so for all practical purposes, the future will never know they existed. Try to find Donald Trump on Twitter. He no longer exists in the land of Twitter. You will need to go outside that safe space to know if he is still around.

The Early Christian religion was called the religion of the slaves. Slaves were very important to upkeep of the Roman lifestyle, and the idea of anyone teaching slaves to feel independent would get you canceled. Jesus also questioned law in favor of faith. Rome did not care if your God was different from their Gods, as long as you did not mess with the laws of Caesar and Rome. Christianity pushed the wrong buttons.

This mentality and the cancel strategy is why it took so long to compile the New Testament. For several centuries one would become a target with a bulls eye on your back. Any form of cruelty to you or yours would be acceptable. The records were purged of Jesus, with the hope this new religion would all go away. But it went underground and surface again after a few hundred years. By 400 years it became the official religion of Rome and would absorb Rome; Holy Roman Empire.

Those who deny the historical Jesus tend to use the cancel culture strategy. Censorship is part of that strategy. Religious freedom makes it hard to make laws to cancel religion, so it has to be done with tactics such as create doubt. They cannot compete in a fair fight, since nobody just flocks to these cults when free speech is allowed. They need to be the only show in town, so you have no other option.

When I first started to write on the net I wrote on various discussion forums in Physics and science. I was accepted until I defended someone who had a religious nature. Some of the members were quite cruel, so I stepped in to see if I could build a bridge between everyone. This good gesture put a target on my back and caused a group of Leftist jackals to gang up and attempt to cancel me; driver me away. They did not know who they were up against and did not have me stamina. In the end, they politicked and manipulated the staff to do their dirty work and cancel me. This may be why I stay in motion and don't pause at one topic too long. Although, religious people are very open to others. I like to move in a spiral; loop back later.

Interesting, but nonetheless does not address the issues and purposes of the thread,

I never said nor cited any claim that the historical Jesus did not exist, In fact historians do accept the historical Jesus existed. The problem remains that there are absolutely no records nor evidence of the miraculous Biblical Jesus nor the extreme events such as the earthquake ever happened This is the topic.

Philo was a prolific writer, went to a pilgrimage to Jerusalem in ~39 AD, and was intimate associated with the family of the rulers and influential families of Jerusalem. No records of Jesus nor the extreme events as recorded in the Bible.

 

[F1fan]

It had to do with the cancel culture at the time of Jesus. On Twitter, there are many people who are not allowed to speak, so for all practical purposes, the future will never know they existed. Try to find Donald Trump on Twitter. He no longer exists in the land of Twitter. You will need to go outside that safe space to know if he is still around.

The Early Christian religion was called the religion of the slaves. Slaves were very important to upkeep of the Roman lifestyle, and the idea of anyone teaching slaves to feel independent would get you canceled. Jesus also questioned law in favor of faith. Rome did not care if your God was different from their Gods, as long as you did not mess with the laws of Caesar and Rome. Christianity pushed the wrong buttons.

This mentality and the cancel strategy is why it took so long to compile the New Testament. For several centuries one would become a target with a bulls eye on your back. Any form of cruelty to you or yours would be acceptable. The records were purged of Jesus, with the hope this new religion would all go away. But it went underground and surface again after a few hundred years. By 400 years it became the official religion of Rome and would absorb Rome; Holy Roman Empire.

Those who deny the historical Jesus tend to use the cancel culture strategy. Censorship is part of that strategy. Religious freedom makes it hard to make laws to cancel religion, so it has to be done with tactics such as create doubt. They cannot compete in a fair fight, since nobody just flocks to these cults when free speech is allowed. They need to be the only show in town, so you have no other option.

When I first started to write on the net I wrote on various discussion forums in Physics and science. I was accepted until I defended someone who had a religious nature. Some of the members were quite cruel, so I stepped in to see if I could build a bridge between everyone. This good gesture put a target on my back and caused a group of Leftist jackals to gang up and attempt to cancel me; driver me away. They did not know who they were up against and did not have me stamina. In the end, they politicked and manipulated the staff to do their dirty work and cancel me. This may be why I stay in motion and don't pause at one topic too long. Although, religious people are very open to others. I like to move in a spiral; loop back later.

I'm skeptical that it was cancel culture. You offer no evidence. Plus, this is the first I've heard of this, why isn't this a more common explanation?

 

[shunyadragon]

I'm skeptical that it was cancel culture. You offer no evidence. Plus, this is the first I've heard of this, why isn't this a more common explanation?

Probably there is no such thing as 'cancel culture' (?) as a historical claim.

 

[shunyadragon]

It had to do with the cancel culture at the time of Jesus. On Twitter, there are many people who are not allowed to speak, so for all practical purposes, the future will never know they existed. Try to find Donald Trump on Twitter. He no longer exists in the land of Twitter. You will need to go outside that safe space to know if he is still around.

The Early Christian religion was called the religion of the slaves. Slaves were very important to upkeep of the Roman lifestyle, and the idea of anyone teaching slaves to feel independent would get you canceled. Jesus also questioned law in favor of faith. Rome did not care if your God was different from their Gods, as long as you did not mess with the laws of Caesar and Rome. Christianity pushed the wrong buttons.

This mentality and the cancel strategy is why it took so long to compile the New Testament. For several centuries one would become a target with a bulls eye on your back. Any form of cruelty to you or yours would be acceptable. The records were purged of Jesus, with the hope this new religion would all go away. But it went underground and surface again after a few hundred years. By 400 years it became the official religion of Rome and would absorb Rome; Holy Roman Empire.

Those who deny the historical Jesus tend to use the cancel culture strategy. Censorship is part of that strategy. Religious freedom makes it hard to make laws to cancel religion, so it has to be done with tactics such as create doubt. They cannot compete in a fair fight, since nobody just flocks to these cults when free speech is allowed. They need to be the only show in town, so you have no other option.

When I first started to write on the net I wrote on various discussion forums in Physics and science. I was accepted until I defended someone who had a religious nature. Some of the members were quite cruel, so I stepped in to see if I could build a bridge between everyone. This good gesture put a target on my back and caused a group of Leftist jackals to gang up and attempt to cancel me; driver me away. They did not know who they were up against and did not have me stamina. In the end, they politicked and manipulated the staff to do their dirty work and cancel me. This may be why I stay in motion and don't pause at one topic too long. Although, religious people are very open to others. I like to move in a spiral; loop back later.

Twitter is the most unreliable source imaginable. There is no such thing as 'cancel culture' in history except for those grasping in mid air for invisible straws.

 

[Subduction Zone]

One has to be careful when one comes across "Christ Mythicism". Some just aim at the miraculous tales told about him in the Bible. When it comes to a historical Jesus they will point out that the actual evidence for him is rather poor. No contemporary results. No quotes from contemporary witnesses. As pointed out by @Polymath257 there were multiple people that were preachers and were crucified. Mythicism appears to be an acknowledgement that he could be an amalgam of those people. We know that some of the stories in the Gospels are false. The two contradictory Nativity myths fail when one investigates them.

To me it does not really matter if an actual Jesus existed or not. Christ Mythicism mostly points out that the evidence for him is not nearly as good as most of us were told when growing up.

 

[F1fan]

Probably there is no such thing as 'cancel culture' (?) as a historical claim.

I would think an exception is how the powers that be during the Ecumenical Councils eliminated many of the rejected books of the Bible project.

 

[F1fan]

One has to be careful when one comes across "Christ Mythicism". Some just aim at the miraculous tales told about him in the Bible. When it comes to a historical Jesus they will point out that the actual evidence for him is rather poor. No contemporary results. No quotes from contemporary witnesses. As pointed out by @Polymath257 there were multiple people that were preachers and were crucified. Mythicism appears to be an acknowledgement that he could be an amalgam of those people. We know that some of the stories in the Gospels are false. The two contradictory Nativity myths fail when one investigates them.

To me it does not really matter if an actual Jesus existed or not. Christ Mythicism mostly points out that the evidence for him is not nearly as good as most of us were told when growing up.

I find this an interesting issue. I have heard that some folks suggest that Jesus traveled to India and learned Buddhism, and he brought this back as an influence to his new teachings. I doubt that story, but I could see how there could have been Hindu or Buddhists traders/travelers that influenced a set of new teachers, and these teachers were popular but then targeted by the Jewish leadership. This could be a basis for the Jesus myth. I do think there was some set of gurus or teachers who introduced the Jesus ideas in the Middle East.

 

[shunyadragon]

I would think an exception is how the powers that be during the Ecumenical Councils eliminated many of the rejected books of the Bible project.

This would not be any form of nebulous 'cancel culture (?)' as described. Philo's writings were just matter of fact, and yes with observations of events and historical facts he recorded in his travels.

 

[Audie]

I am generally skeptical of the Biblical account as it is, and as reflected in the claims of Orthodox Christianity

Well, ah . . the three (number not specified in the gospels) is one of the unknowns of NT history. If as the known very limited historical information indicates, and the fact that Philos and other writers at the time did not leave a footnote for the existence of Jesus, than the three(?) wise men are likely another embellishment of the life of the Biblical Jesus Christ.

As in how many of which stories are at least psrtly true the nativity thing being extremely unlikely.
As is the earthquake, sudden darkness and zombies.

 

[Audie]

This would not be any form of nebulous 'cancel culture (?)' as described. Philo's writings were just matter of fact, and yes with observations of events and historical facts he recorded in his travels.

C Columbus logbook would be a matter of recording facts.
There's an entry about two of the sailors
seeing a mermaid.

 

[lukethethird]

Why do skeptics question whether the Biblical Jesus Christ ever existed?
04-20-2022, 01:01 PM

Historians general accept that Jesus was a real figure that lived during time the NT describes, a rabbi? that taught a Messianic message, claimed to be the Kig of the Jews, was condemned in Roman Court of Rebellion against Rome by claiming to be the King of the Jews, and was crucified under Roman Law. The question arises what about the Biblical Jesus Christ that skeptics seriously question ever existed. The life and records of Philo are a witness to this problem of the existence of the Biblical Jesus Christ.


Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/DebateAChr..._didnt_philo_of_alexandria_write_about_jesus/


Why didn't Philo of Alexandria write about Jesus or Christianity?

Philo of Alexandria was born: 25 BCE in Alexandria, Egypt. He died: 47-50 CE. He wrote an account of the Jews covering the entire time that Jesus is said to have existed on earth. He was living in or near Jerusalem when Jesus' miraculous birth and the Herodian massacre occurred. Philo spent time in Jerusalem where he had intimate connections with the royal house of Judaea. One of Alexander's sons (and Philo's nephews, Marcus) was married to Berenice, daughter of Herod Agrippa, tetrarch of Galilee and Peraea, 39-40. After the exile of Herod Antipas – villain of the Jesus saga – Marcus ruled as King of the Jews, 41-44 AD. But nothing from Philo on Jesus, the other 'King of the Jews'.

Philo was there when Jesus made his triumphal entry into Jerusalem. He was there when the crucifixion with an earthquake, daytime darkness, and resurrection of the dead 'saints' took place and when Jesus rose from the dead after 3 days. He was there when Jesus ascended into heaven. About thirty manuscripts and at least 850,000 words by Philo are extant. It was Philo who developed the doctrine of the Logos, or Word, and although Jesus, this Word incarnate, was walking around giving speeches and performing miracles, Philo wrote not one word about him or any of this.

© Copyright Original Source

I am aware of theologians claiming that Jesus is historical, but I am not aware of any historians that make that claim.

 

[shunyadragon]

I am aware of theologians claiming that Jesus is historical, but I am not aware of any historians that make that claim.

Jesus, Skepticism, and the Problem of History: Criteria and Context in the Study of Christian Origins Paperback – October 8, 2019
by Zondervan (Author), Darrell L. Bock (Editor), J. Ed Komoszewski & 1 more

In recent years, a number of New Testament scholars engaged in academic historical Jesus studies have concluded that such scholarship cannot yield secure and illuminating conclusions about its subject, arguing that the search for a historically "authentic" Jesus has run aground.

Jesus, Skepticism, and the Problem of History brings together a stellar lineup of New Testament scholars who contend that historical Jesus scholarship is far from dead.

These scholars all find value in using the tools of contemporary historical methods in the study of Jesus and Christian origins. While the skeptical use of criteria to fashion a Jesus contrary to the one portrayed in the Gospels is methodologically unsound and theologically unacceptable, these criteria, properly formulated and applied, yield positive results that support the Gospel accounts and the historical narrative in Acts. This book presents a nuanced and vitally needed alternative to the skeptical extremes of revisionist Jesus scholarship that, on the one hand, uses historical methods to call into question the Jesus of the Gospels and, on the other, denies the possibility of using historical methods to learn about Jesus.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Why do skeptics question whether the Biblical Jesus Christ ever existed?
04-20-2022, 01:01 PM

Historians general accept that Jesus was a real figure that lived during time the NT describes, a rabbi? that taught a Messianic message, claimed to be the Kig of the Jews, was condemned in Roman Court of Rebellion against Rome by claiming to be the King of the Jews, and was crucified under Roman Law. The question arises what about the Biblical Jesus Christ that skeptics seriously question ever existed. The life and records of Philo are a witness to this problem of the existence of the Biblical Jesus Christ.


Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/DebateAChr..._didnt_philo_of_alexandria_write_about_jesus/


Why didn't Philo of Alexandria write about Jesus or Christianity?

Philo of Alexandria was born: 25 BCE in Alexandria, Egypt. He died: 47-50 CE. He wrote an account of the Jews covering the entire time that Jesus is said to have existed on earth. He was living in or near Jerusalem when Jesus' miraculous birth and the Herodian massacre occurred. Philo spent time in Jerusalem where he had intimate connections with the royal house of Judaea. One of Alexander's sons (and Philo's nephews, Marcus) was married to Berenice, daughter of Herod Agrippa, tetrarch of Galilee and Peraea, 39-40. After the exile of Herod Antipas – villain of the Jesus saga – Marcus ruled as King of the Jews, 41-44 AD. But nothing from Philo on Jesus, the other 'King of the Jews'.

Philo was there when Jesus made his triumphal entry into Jerusalem. He was there when the crucifixion with an earthquake, daytime darkness, and resurrection of the dead 'saints' took place and when Jesus rose from the dead after 3 days. He was there when Jesus ascended into heaven. About thirty manuscripts and at least 850,000 words by Philo are extant. It was Philo who developed the doctrine of the Logos, or Word, and although Jesus, this Word incarnate, was walking around giving speeches and performing miracles, Philo wrote not one word about him or any of this.

© Copyright Original Source

Why do people keep calling Jesus a Rabbi? Traditional Jews don't even acknowledge Jesus much less being a recognized Jew on top of it all. .
I think its likely Jesus was a Roman invention designed to bring dissenters under control.

 

[Augustus]

I would think an exception is how the powers that be during the Ecumenical Councils
eliminated many of the rejected books of the Bible project.

This is pretty a much a myth that assumes far greater ability to project and enforce power regarding minor issues than actually existed.

How would they "eliminate" them?

What would the process of "eliminating" a widely distributed text look like in the ancient world without modern communication or transport technology and necessarily decentralised government?

It took months to get communications to regions, months to get reports back and so most local governors did pretty much what they wanted and could flat out ignore most things if they chose as long as they toed the line just enough.

Then, even if everyone actually did want to "eliminate" texts (which they didn't), it would be near impossible, and massively expensive, to conduct some policing operation to find needles in thousand mile wide haystacks.