Marrying the Wives of Adopted Sons?

The claim is that 33:37 permits marrying the divorced wives of adopted sons, while 33:5 forbids adoption altogether - making the permission in 33:37 incoherent.

The false claim: 33:5 bans adoption, making 33:37's ruling about adopted sons' wives a contradiction.

It is not forbidden to adopt sons. The claim rests entirely on a misreading of 33:5. Let us read the verse:

[33:5] You shall give your adopted children the names of their genetic fathers. This is more equitable in the sight of GOD. If you do not know their fathers, then, as your brethren in religion, you shall give them names that reflect your religion. You are not to be blamed for honest mistakes; you are responsible only for intentional acts. GOD is Forgiver, Most Merciful.

There is no prohibition of adoption in this verse. There is not even a hint of one. The verse addresses adopted children directly - "give your adopted children the names of their genetic fathers" - which presupposes that adoption exists and is being practiced. God is not banning an arrangement He is simultaneously issuing instructions about. He is regulating it.

The single rule God establishes in 33:5 is that adopted children should retain their biological father's name rather than take the adoptive father's name. This is a matter of lineage and identity - God calls it more equitable because it preserves the child's true origins and prevents confusion about family relationships, inheritance, and marriage prohibitions. The compassion in the verse is evident: if the biological father is unknown, the child may be called after brethren in religion or those close to them. And God adds His characteristic mercy: honest mistakes in this matter are not held against anyone.

The verse approves, regulates, and shows mercy toward adoption. It prohibits nothing except the erasure of a child's biological identity through a false attribution of lineage. These are entirely different things. A person can adopt a child, care for them, love them, provide for them, and remain their guardian in every meaningful sense - while still acknowledging who the child's biological parents are. That is what 33:5 requires. That is all it requires.

The claimed contradiction therefore has no foundation. 33:37 permits a man to marry the divorced wife of an adopted son because the adopted son is not a genetic son - the lineage restriction that applies to biological sons does not apply. This ruling flows directly from the principle in 33:5: adoption does not create biological family ties, and the law treats the two relationships differently as a result. Far from contradicting each other, the two verses are built on the same underlying logic.