I know that Jesus is the transliteration of the Greek word for Joshua. Totally get that.
Here's the question -- in Acts (and other places), another person named Joshua is mentioned, but he is actually called "Joshua". Why is that?
Biblical Hermeneutics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for professors, theologians, and those interested in exegetical analysis of biblical texts. It only takes a minute to sign up.Sign up to join this community
In the original Greek they're the same: Ἰησοῦς /jeisus/
In the Vulgate they're also the same: Jesus /jesus/
Interestingly, even Wycliffe and the KJV, among a few others, use Jesus in all instances.
So it would seem that differentiating them is a modern choice, presumably to avoid confusion since "Jesus" is taken to refer to one person only (despite the allusions his Hebrew name suggests!).
To my knowledge, this is done in most European languages (I was able to check German, French, and Spanish), though Wikipedia says that in Modern Greek and in Slavic languages they do still use the same name for both people and qualify Joshua with longer phrases.
Out of curiosity, I checked those passages in the 2009 Hebrew NT (Habrit-Hakhadasha / Haderekh), and even there they chose to distinguish them (יהושע yehoshua vs. ישוע yeshua).
יהושע = Yehu is/will save while ישוע(ה) = salvation.
Some background: יהו can be in the begining or the end of a name to keep what written in Genesis 4 verse 26.
With יהו we can find אל. Example: יהושפט, יהורם, ישעיהו or Yehoshafat, Yehoram, Issaia(yaho) and etc.
And with אל examples: ישמעאל, אליהו or Ismail(written Ismael), Eliyahu.
So even if it original translated to Greek the same, in Hebrew it's not.