They didn’t even live in the same time period. Joshua lived during the time of the conquest of Canaan, and Ruth lived near the end of the time of the judges. So there’s not any way they even would have known each other.
Just noticed a few things here:
-
The transliteration for “Musa” should have a macron over the “u”, as that’s a long vowel.
-
The Arabic text for “Jesus” doesn’t actually say “Jesus”, but “al-Masīḥ”, i.e. “the Messiah”.
-
The “t” in the transliteration of “Butros” should have a dot under it, as it’s an emphatic “t.aa” instead of a “taa”.
whoosh
Consider me whooshed. Can you explain the joke?
Hint: Recite the names of the first eight books of the Bible (Christian version) in order.
Oh. 
Different bible.
It depends. (Sorry, but it does, although most names have simply been imitative sounds from other languages.)
Some names carried over by meaning and others carried over by (perceived) sound.
When the Hebrew bible was translated to Greek, Adam (whose etymological roots we can discover, but whose name had already become “just” a name) carried over almost unchanged. On the other hand, the name Hawwa’ means “life” and it was translated as [symbol]Zwh[/symbol] (Zôê = life), however, when it was translated to Latin, only the sound was carried over and modified to be Hava that eventually showed up in English as Eve.
The original story of Jesus changing the name of Simon would have resulted (in Aramaic) with the new name being Kepha. (This is attested by Paul’s references to Kephas with the Greek ending on the name.) Later, when Matthew wrote his Gospel, he translated Kepha into Petros (for the man) and petra (for the stone) in order to show his Greek audience the pun. When the Gospels were carried over to Latin, the name was Latinized by the simple expedient of giving it a Latin ending, Petrus from Petros. Then with the name already in the Latin language as a name, the evolution of the Romance languages led to Pietro, Pedro, Pierre, etc. Then, when the name was carried up into Germanic lands, the ending was simply modified to be the more Germanic (and, later, English, Peter), having long lost its aramaic meaning of “rock.”
Other names have similarly checkered histories. The Greek [symbol]Petros[/symbol] and [symbol]Zwh[/symbol] still exist in that language, but other names are less likely to have meanings in other languages.
For Vietnamese, there’s a “work-around” for the diacritics (you put the diacritic symbol after the letter concerned, and tone mark after the diacritic):
Joshua is Gio^-sue^ (no tones).
And it’s usually the major, popular characters that get latter-language versions to evolve for them. BTW, another major biblical name who got “modernized” differently in the NT version vs. the OT version was Yakov – the patriarch from the OT became rendered as Jacob, but the two Apostles of the same name became “James”.
Looks like Vietnamese cribbed from Italian. The Italian form of Joshua is Giosuè.
In Turkish, adam is a loanword from Arabic, and they use it to mean just ‘person’ or ‘guy’.
Actually, the priests who came up with the Vietnamese writing system were Portuguese and French. So, it’s no surprise at all that they cribbed from certain European languages.