According to Paul L Maier, most modern biographies of Herod do not believe the massacre took place.[170] Steve Mason argues that if the massacre had taken place as described in Matthew, it would have been strange for Josephus not to mention it, and that the massacre may hence be non-historical.[171] E. P. Sanders characterizes Josephus' writing as dwelling on Herod's cruelty, thus suggesting that Josephus would probably have included the event if it had occurred.[152] Sanders states that faced with little historical information, Matthew's account is apparently based on the story in which an infant Moses is endangered by the Pharaoh in order to kill infant Hebrews and that such use of scripture for telling the story of Jesus' birth was considered legitimate by contemporary standards.[152] Dunn seconds this theory and sees the episode as an attempt to present Jesus as the new Moses by refreshing the Jewish memories of the slaughter of Hebrew newborns in Egypt.[172]