The Masked arab and the Dunning Kruger effect, Does the Quran Palegrize alexander the Great? Using the Masked arab Sources against him (abridged)

Introduction:

I have decided to separate this part of an old article i had into it's own dedicated article, i took the masked arab only source and used it against him.

in regards to my upcoming part 2 article, i will address his allegation of contradictions in the Quran
i would like to leave a note that soon probably i'll be making a youtube channel

Since this is a very short rebuttal to his video regarding the similarities between Alexander the Great romance and the Quran,  the issue lies in Alexander Romance on the Syriac I would like to leave you with this academic refutation to his video[1] [2] [3] it’s imperative we understand at what age the Syriac translation of Alexander romance was written compared to the Quranic revelation, so according to the masked arab childish logic, the Quran borrows from a source written a century or two centuries after it was revealed, can anyone take this logic seriously?

However when I was reading through the manuscript used by the masked arab I came across in the preference of the author a striking claim where he said “ the Syriac text is edited from five manuscripts, the oldest of which was written about one hundred and eighty years ago” [4]

The Author doesn’t stop there he continues on citing 

“the short introduction of this edition of the Syriac version of pseudo-Callisthenes I have made few remarks on some of the versions of the Alexander story based on careful works of favre, Muller, Zacher, Berger de Xivery, Spiegel and others the Persian version of the story I have not attempted to describe for I have no knowledge of the language, though late (900-1300), they seem to me to be considerable importance for they in all probability represent Arabic originals which are no longer extant similarly I have not tried to discuss the story from folk-lor point of view”[5]

Later on the author used by the masked arab state the following statement regarding the Syriac version, this shall be the final nail in the coffin for his video

“when the Syriac translation was made I am Unable to say; but I believe that we may assign it to some period between the seventh and the ninth centuries………he believed that the Syriac version was Pseudo-Callisthenes was made from Arabic translation of Greek origin and placed the making of the work much later than I have done, namely in the tenth century

…..an older Syriac translation may have appeared in the sixth century, about the time when the first Syriac translation of Kalilag we-Damnag was made; I do not however, see any evidence in the Syriac translation of Pseudo-Callisthenes which we have before us sufficient to justify us in assigning the work to that early period”[6]

So it’s apparent that this work is very late the author himself the Syriac ant the Persian verse

This is imperative as he says “I do not however, see any evidence in the Syriac translation of Pseudo-Callisthenes which we have before us sufficient to justify us in assigning the work to that early period” this is a reference to the translation we have in our hands, and he is saying that there is no evidence to justify the claim that it was as early as the sixth century

This is the man the masked Arab is using, and the masked arab was so dishonest he didn’t fully read the book and presented the preference and the detail examination to the Syriac version

This is not me bringing some other work, I'm quoting the sole authority the masked arab is quoting directly, as he puts the Syriac version right between 7^th to 10^th century, other scholars as noted in the links I provided have made the agreement that it’s either from the 8^th century of 9^th century

Which shows some scholars to have disagreement among each other regarding the date of the manuscript but one thing we know for sure that it didn’t predate the recording time where the Quran was revealed

So according to the masked arab logic, the quran is borrowing from sources that are written later after the reveal of the quran

According to Theodore Noldeke the Quranic chapter 18 (the chapter associated with Alexander romance is a Mecca surah, he puts it around the fifth or the sixth year of his mission[7] that puts it right around 615 or 616

According to Richard Stoneman, Kyle Erickson, Ian Richard in their book The Alexander Romance in Persia and the East

“Alexander romance of Pseudo-Callisthenes into Syriac around 600 ad possibly through a Pahlavi intermediary, shortly afterward between 628 and 636 the apocalyptic Christian Syriac Alexander legend and the homily were composed”[8]

Can anyone take this poor excuse for a research seriously?

For more thorough refutations to the myth of the Quran borrowing from Alexander Romance please read the links I cited to Islamic awareness website

____________________________________________

[1] http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Sources/BBalex.html

[2] http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Sources/BBgilg.html

[3] http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Sources/BBhorned.html

[4] https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B76p5GnL05obbk8xSFFSNHNhb0k/view  (preface page)

[5] Ibid

[6] Alexander Romance Page 32 (Ix)

[7] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meccan_surah

[8] The Alexander Romance in Persia and the East Page.62