[181] See many details in C.M., pp. 52-57. [182] Refs. in P.C. 51, note 6. Dr. Conybeare (pp. 29, 30) meets such conclusions of scholars (Stade, Winckler, Sayce, etc.) by excluding them from his list of "serious Semitic scholars." [183] Exod. xviii, 12. [184] Gen. xiv, 18; Ps. cx, 4. [185] Heb. vii, 3. Cp. v, 6, 10; vii, 11, 17. [186] P.C. 179. [187] E.S. 115; Hatch, Hibbert Lectures, p. 291 sq. [188] Or Jehoshua--the Hebrew name of which Iesous is the Greek equivalent. [189] P.C. 163. [190] The miracle of hastening the sun's setting is in Homer (Il. xviii, 239) assigned to Hêrê, the chief Goddess. [191] P.C. 220. [192] Josh. v, 13-15 is clearly late. In ch. xxiv the angel is not mentioned. [193] P.C. 314, 315. [194] Etheridge, The Targums on the Pentateuch, 1862, p. 5. [195] The Samaritans have a late book ascribing to him many feats not given in the Jewish records. Concerning this Professor Drews wrote (Christ Myth, p. 57, note):--"The Samaritan Book of Joshua (Chronicon Samaritanum, published 1848) was written in Arabic during the thirteenth century in Egypt, and is based upon an old work compiled in the third century B.C." Dr. Conybeare (Hist. Christ, p. 33) declares the last statement to be "founded on pure ignorance," adding: "and the Encyclopædia Biblica declares it to be a medieval production of no value to anyone except the student of the Samaritan sect under Moslem rule." Be it observed (1) that Dr. Drews had actually described the book as a medieval production; (2), that his whole point was that it was legendary, not historical; and (3) that the Ency. Bib. article, which bears out both propositions, uses no such language as Dr. Conybeare ascribes to it after the word "production," and says nothing whatever on the hypothesis that the book is founded on a compilation of the third century B.C. That hypothesis, framed by Hebraists, is one upon which Dr. Conybeare has not the slightest right to an opinion. Dr. A. E. Cowley, in the Encyc. Brit., describes the book as derived from "sources of various dates." That being so, Dr. Conybeare, who as usual has wholly failed to understand what he is attacking, has never touched the position, which is that Joshua legends so flourished among the Samaritans that they are preserved in a medieval book--unless he means to allege that the legends are of medieval invention, a proposition which, indeed, would fitly consummate his excursion. [196] Yeho-shua = "Yah [or Yeho] is welfare." [197] Cp. Josh. v, 2-10. [198] Canon Charles, The Book of Jubilees, 1902, p. 9, note 29.