Assalamu Aleikum Muzi123,
I’ve quickly scanned through the 2 video parts of what you linked to, and let’s just say, without extensively indulging what has been discussed throughout the videos, that for a rebuttal and defense for the Bible as well as a response to the Quran, this wasn’t exactly what may be qualified as a “quality rebuttal†of any kind, which isn’t anything new really since even though there will always be the “rebuttal†for everything, actually analyzing said rebuttal will prove it to be nothing but nonsense and conjecture being argued.
The point you brought up is a fine example of that, briefly put:
This isn’t the Bible here, we’re making reference to the Quran, and context is everything, so then what is the context of the Quran or any verses contained therein?
Quite simply, it’s the Quran itself.
Here’s the verse that was being referenced:
''Lawful to you is game from the sea and its food as provision for you and the travelers, but forbidden to you is game from the land as long as you are in the state of ihram. And fear Allah to whom you will be gathered.'' [5:96]
Just using logic and common sense first of all, this one here is so clear, the verse says ''
and its food as provision for you''.
A fish known to be poisonous and deadly is obviously not food, here’s the definition of food as in food for Sakshi et al (the Indian missionary group in the videos):
''any nutritious substance that people or animals eat or drink or that plants absorb
in order to maintain life and growth: tins of cat food''
http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/foodNow on to the actual context which is the Quran itself in its entirety, which is and has always been meant to be taken as a whole and not by quoting bits, words and verses out of context to mislead people.
The verse before anything begins by defining the sport/game and its food (food as has always been logically understood and defined such as the above) as
lawful, or
halal in Arabic.
So then what is lawful food, no matter what it is and unless otherwise explicitly mentioned, according to the Quran?
These 2 verses are the brief answers:
''O mankind, eat from whatever is on earth [that is]
lawful and good and do not follow the footsteps of Satan. Indeed, he is to you a clear enemy.'' [2:168]
''
O you who have believed, eat from the good things which We have provided for you and be grateful to Allah if it is [indeed] Him that you worship.'' [2:172]
The first one begins saying eat whatever you may want on Earth that is
lawful and good, that is, all kinds of fish may be lawful as per certain hadeeths, but at the same time, lawful in Islam no matter where it is taken from, implies what is good right with it, they go hand in hand both of them.
Put in a simpler way, what is not good, as in harmful, deadly, poisonous, etc, cannot be lawful.
And the second verse reiterates the same point mentioning directly what is good to be the only allowed source of food, it being lawful simply assumed unless otherwise stated as with some meats people may stubbornly want to consume despite much evidence of it being harmful and unhealthy such as pork meat, dead meat, and so forth.
Many more verses in the Quran unanimously clearly point this out, but as with about let’s say 96% of the whole 2 part video presentation this was just such a silly thing to bring in as an “argumentâ€, but you just get used to it considering those types of guys are really just literally desperate to find “errors†and “contradictions†to argue about and bring the Quran to the level of their corrupt scriptures which even their most reputed scholars and theologians have all mostly admitted to.
The other 4% amounts to extremely poor knowledge of the Arabic language and quoting wrong translations of words/verses and presenting them as “errorsâ€, which may or may not be done intentionally (usually intentionally) so on those the benefit of the doubt will be admitted.
Regards.
