[199] This thesis was substantially put by me in the first edition of Pagan Christs (1903). Dr. Conybeare, who appears incapable of accuracy in such matters, ascribes the Joshua theory (Hist. Christ, pp. 32, 35) and the special hypothesis that Joshua was mythically the son of Miriam, to Professor Smith, who never broached either. His pretext is a passage in the preface to the second edition of Christianity and Mythology, which he perverts in defiance of the context. On this basis he proceeds to charge "imitation." Aspersion in Dr. Conybeare's polemic is usually thus independent of fact. [200] Historical Christ, p. 17. [201] Id. pp. 8-9. [202] Neither is it put by Prof. Drews, who merely cites (above, p. 41, note) from Niemojewski, without endorsing it, an "astral" theory of Jesus and Pilate. Dr. Conybeare appears incapable of giving a true account of anything he antagonizes, whether in politics or in religion. Elsewhere Drews speaks of astral elements in the Christ story; but so do those adherents of the biographical school who recognize the zodiacal source of the Woman-and-Child myth in Revelation. [203] At another point (p. 87, note) Dr. Conybeare triumphantly cites Winckler as saying that "the humanization of the Joshua myth was complete when the book of Joshua was compiled." This grants the whole case. "Humanization" tells of previous deity; and just as Achilles remained a God after being presented in the Iliad, Joshua was "human" only for those whose sole lore concerning him was that of the Hexateuch. [204] Der vorchristliche Jesus, p. 1 sq. [205] Mk. v, 27; Lk. xxiv, 19; Acts xviii, 25; xxviii, 31. [206] Perhaps an exception should be made of Dr. Conybeare, who believes Jesus to have been a "successful exorcist" (M.M.M. p. 142). This writer sees no difficulty in the fact that in Mark Jesus is no exorcist at Nazareth, and refuses to work wonders. [207] P.C. 164. [208] Rev. xxi, 14. [209] iv, 4. [210] Cp. ii, 9; iii, 9. [211] iii, 14, 15; xix, 13. [212] Origins of Christianity, ed. 1914, p. 27. [213] Found in the Alexandrian and Vatican codices, and preferred by Lachmann, Tregelles, and Westcott and Hort. [214] to deuteron. The R.V. puts "afterward" in the text, with "Gr. the second time" in the margin. Mr. Whittaker reads "afterward" also, after "the second time"--apparently by oversight. [215] Deane, Pseudepigrapha, 1891, p. 312. [216] Josh. xxiv, 31, in Septuagint. [217] C.M. 352. [218] Art. by H. G. Wood in The Cambridge Magazine, Jan. 20, 1917, p. 216. [219] P.C. 202. [220] Cambridge Magazine, Feb. 3, 1917, p. 289. [221] G.B. v, 45 sq., 223; P.C. 364, 373-4. [222] P.C. 112 sq., 131 sq., 140, 142, 144, 352, 362-4, 368.