Talk:Qur'anic contradictions

Can Allah have a son?
I think the extract below "Yes, Allah can do anything" would be more correctly interpreted as "Allah can select any entity of his creation to bear the status of being his son if he so chooses." In this way, it doesn't really conflict that much with the passage from the "No, Allah has no consort" section, since that's talking about Allah not having biologically-produced offspring. 141.134.75.236 (talk) 20:50, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Hm. I think you're right. I'm going to remove that section for now. Thanks! 20:54, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

To do
Herr FuzzyKatzenPotato (talk/stalk) 23:05, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
 * https://sites.google.com/site/muslimanswers/Home/contradictions/alcohol

Is Iblis an angel or a jinn?
Please properly link/ list what those (Angels and Jinns) are within the context of the Qur'an and whether they are actually distinguishable from each other (within the observation techniques back then) so this would actually be an issue (If Angels = Jinns by most standards back then There isn't much of a problem). User:K61824User_talk:K61824 15:58, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

Creation of man
@User:Edger Halogen The Qur'an talks about two different things: the creation of the first man, Adam, from dust/mud/clay and the creation of every other man by reproduction (clot/sperm). Verses (-7 are quite clearly referring to sperm (a drop or water, used as an euphemism for sperm according to Lane's lexicon), as نُطْفَةً literally means 'a little water' but is used as a euphemism for sperm, as Lane's lexicon (pp. 3034) states. Same goes for the fluid, which the header quite clearly clarifies is "often interpreted as semen". The clot (-2) refers to the fetus.
 * "And indeed, We created humankind from an extract of clay, then placed each human as a sperm-drop in a secure place, then We developed the drop into a clinging clot of blood, then developed the clot into a lump of flesh, then developed the lump into bones, then clothed the bones with flesh, then We brought it into being as a new creation. So Blessed is Allah, the Best of Creators." (-14)
 * The section is called "What were humans created from?" and that can have a broad range of meanings and implications, so don't delete things that provide information to others determining whatever the hell it is that the book of fables is supposedly saying. If you want to add a little clarifying text, then go for it. My vote is that the article text is long-standing and should remain.Edger Halogen (talk) 08:40, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
 * I do believe it is an important thing to make a distinction between reproduction and the creation of Adam because these are two different things in Islam, as I've shown in the verses cited. Just because it is a "book of fables" doesn't mean that it should be misrepresented. That bogs down the message of the article as it makes it dishonest. Imagine a Muslim saying that science is wrong because abiogenesis and fertilization aren't the same. GreenlandGneiss (talk) 08:57, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Then write some (brief) explanatory notes next to the established points in the article. E.g. "This was for adam", "This was for non-adam", etc. Edger Halogen (talk) 19:57, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Or maybe change the question entirely to "How was Adam made?" The matter of reproduction is not contradictory in the Qur'an. GreenlandGneiss (talk) 12:45, 28 February 2023 (UTC)