Prophetic Infallibility (ʿIṣmah) and the Sacred Status of Jerusalem (al-Quds): The Qurʾānic Narratives as the Proofs of Divine Sovereignty

APA 7 Citation:

Salim, S. B. (2026). Prophetic Infallibility (ʿIṣmah) and the Sacred Status of Jerusalem (al-Quds): The Qurʾānic Narratives as the Proofs of Divine Sovereignty. International Journal of Research, 13(1), 66–78. https://doi.org/10.26643/eduindex/ijr/2026/3

Suriyati Binti Salim

Department of Civil Law, Ahmad Ibrahim Kulliyyah of Laws, International Islamic University, Malaysia

Email: surisalim92@gmail.com / suriyati.salim@live.iium.edu.my

ORCID ID: https://orcid://0009-0007-8150-5770

Abstract 

Prevailing scholarship primarily interprets the differences between Qurʾānic and Biblical Prophetic narratives as theological polemics or literary adaptations. Nevertheless, this study addresses a significant gap by examining the foundational role of these narratives in establishing sovereignty over sacred territory. Specifically, it introduces a framework titled ‘Narratives of Loss versus the Reality of Permanence.’ This analysis highlights a fundamental contrast: the historiography of the Hebrew Bible often links the loss of the Holy Land to the moral failures of its kings, establishing a paradigm of a ruined sanctuary. In contrast, the Qurʾān provides a direct affirmation of truth regarding the Prophets. Through qualitative comparative textual analysis of nine key episodes, including the accounts of Solomon, David, and Aaron, this research illustrates how the Qurʾān affirms the absolute Prophetic infallibility (ʿiṣmah) of the Prophets. By establishing their righteousness, the Qurʾān severs the biblical connection between leadership sin and territorial forfeiture. A pivotal finding is the account of Solomon, which affirms al-Aqṣā not as a theologically ‘ruined’ temple, but as a perpetually sanctified mosque. Consequently, these scriptural truths constitute a foundational political theology, providing a clear lens for understanding custodianship over sacred space. This rendering of history serves as a foundational element in territorial claims and significantly contributes to the fields of political theology, sacred geography, and comparative Qurʾānic studies.

Keywords: The Qurʾān; Jerusalem (al-Quds); Sacred Space; Comparative Scripture; ʿIṣmah (Prophetic Infallibility); Political Theology

1. Introduction 

The Qurʾān and the Jewish Bible (Tanakh) share a substantial narrative heritage centered on prophetic figures such as Abraham, Moses, David, and Solomon. Nevertheless, despite this common lineage, the two scriptures frequently diverge in their portrayals of prophetic moral character and conduct. Traditionally, these divergences have been interpreted through theological polemic, sectarian identity formation, or processes of literary reception. Although such approaches yield valuable insights, they remain limited in that they largely treat scripture as a doctrinal or communal medium, while insufficiently examining its function in constructing legal, political, and territorial meaning. Consequently, the narrative architecture of sacred texts is rarely analysed for its role in legitimising claims over land, sovereignty, and sacred space.

Accordingly, the sacred territory implicated in both Qurʾānic and biblical narratives refers to geographically and theologically significant sites in the Levant, most notably Jerusalem and its surrounding precincts. The Qurʾān explicitly sanctifies Jerusalem’s precincts, referring to al-Masjid al-Aqṣā: “Glory be to the One Who took His servant ˹Muḥammad˺ by night from the Sacred Mosque to the Farthest Mosque whose surroundings We have blessed, so that We may show him some of Our signs. Indeed, He alone is the All-Hearing, All-Seeing.” (Qurʾān 17:1). This sanctity was liturgically enacted in early Islam, as the Qurʾān itself references the community’s original direction of prayer (qiblah) prior to its reorientation towards Makkah (Qurʾān 2:142-143). This divine acknowledgement of a prior qiblah, universally understood in the Islamic tradition to be Jerusalem, reinforces the site’s inherent, enduring sacred status independent of its later liturgical function. In particular, the Temple Mount, known in Jewish tradition as Har HaBayit and in Islam as al-Ḥaram al-Sharīf, occupies a central position in this scriptural memory and contemporary legal–political discourse. Importantly, this site lies within the Old City of Jerusalem rather than along the Israel–Palestine border as such, yet it functions as a symbolic and material focal point of competing religious, historical, and juridical claims. Consequently, scriptural references to sacred land operate not merely at the level of theology but actively inform debates concerning authority, sovereignty, and territorial legitimacy.

Accordingly, while sacred sites intensify the symbolic dimensions of the Israel–Palestine conflict, the conflict itself cannot be reduced to religious disagreement. Rather, it is rooted in colonial intervention, rival nationalist projects, territorial control, and unresolved legal arrangements that emerged during the British Mandate period and crystallised through the events of 1917–1948. Consequently, sacred geography must be understood as embedded within a broader matrix of historical dispossession, competing claims to self-determination, and contested legal authority, rather than as an isolated cause.

In contrast to the Hebrew Bible’s conditional covenantal historiography, which links territorial sanctity to prophetic and communal failure and produces a recurring narrative of loss, the Qurʾān affirms the moral impeccability of the Prophets. According to Qurʾān 2:253, “We have chosen some of those messengers above others. Allah spoke directly to some, and raised some high in rank. To Jesus, son of Mary, We gave clear proofs and supported him with the holy spirit. If Allah had willed, succeeding generations would not have fought ˹among themselves˺ after receiving the clear proofs. But they differed—some believed while others disbelieved. Yet if Allah had willed, they would not have fought one another. But Allah does what He wills.”

Therefore, while the Prophet Muḥammad Peace Be Upon Him is regarded as the Khatam an-Nabiyyin (the Seal of the Prophets) and holds the highest rank of excellence, he shares the fundamental attribute of moral impeccability with all his predecessors. These renderings, grounded in the doctrine of prophetic infallibility (ʿiṣmah), generate a reality of permanence in which sacred sites consecrated by sinless Prophets remain in a state of enduring sanctity.

Accordingly, this article demonstrates how this reality is presented with force in relation to Jerusalem. Through specific narrative accounts, the Qurʾān’s revelation affirms the true nature of the Prophets, thereby proving al-Aqṣā as a perpetually valid sanctuary. Consequently, the study situates the Qurʾānic narrative not merely as a theological revelation, but as a foundational mechanism for vindicating sacred geography and legitimising contemporary claims of custodianship over holy space.

2. Literature Review 

Existing scholarship provides essential components for this analysis, but it frequently stops short of connecting textual mechanics to concrete geopolitical claims.

2.1         Comparative Narrative Studies 

Foundational comparative work, such as Afsar’s (2007) study of the sacrifice narrative and Lowin’s (2011) exploration of Abrahamic exegesis meticulously documents the nature of Qur’ānic-Biblical differences. These scholars effectively catalogue the variations, interpreting them through lenses of communal boundary-marking, theological refinement, or intertextual dialogue. However, this line of inquiry often remains within the realm of hermeneutics or identity politics, seldom extending its analysis to ask why these specific narratives might be critically important for legitimising claims to a specific, contested geography like Jerusalem.

2.2. Theology of Leadership and Theodicy 

Recent research has deepened the understanding of the Islamic affirmation of prophetic figures as exemplary and morally protected. Hannah An’s (2021) analysis of Saul and David in the Qurʾān illustrates the depiction of an idealised, divinely-guided model of vicegerency. Suleiman Hani’s (2020) work on theodicy is pivotal, reframing prophetic suffering in the Qurʾān not as punishment for sin but as a divine test (fitnah) and a means of spiritual elevation. Furthermore, Rosshandler’s (2025) review of scholarship on the Golden Calf episode underscores the necessity of recognising Aaron’s integrity to understand the status of the prophetic line. Collectively, this body of work provides a robust theological rationale for the doctrine of ʿiṣmah, but typically does not explore its implications for the status of the land these leaders sanctified.

2.3. Civilisational Historiography 

Nornizam Jamal’s (2023) Kitab Tamadun Yahudi offers a crucial macro-historical lens. By charting Jewish civilisation’s self-understanding through the core themes of covenant, transgression, exile, and hope, Jamal’s analysis clarifies the historical narrative that the Qur’ān addresses through its own unique historical perspective.

2.4. Geopolitics of Sacred Space 

Scholars like Burgess (2004) and Houk (2015) directly bridge the worlds of text and territory. Burgess theorises the Temple Mount as a ‘civil space’ where colliding historical memories create a legally and politically precarious environment. Houk documents how literal interpretations of biblical prophecies demanding physical reconstruction of the Temple pose tangible challenges to the existing status quo of the al-Aqṣā compound.

2.5. Identifying the Research Gap 

A clear disconnect persists. Scholars of text and theology expertly analyse the mechanics of narrative difference, while scholars of geopolitics analyse the contemporary consequences of competing historical claims. The missing link is an explicit examination of how the Qur’ān’s affirmation of Prophetic integrity serves as the primary theological foundation for the claim to sacred space that scholars like Burgess and Houk observe in contemporary conflict.

3. Methodology 

To systematically identify and analyse the Qurʾānic perspective, this study employs a structured qualitative methodology focused on isolating points of Prophetic Integrity.

A targeted comparative narrative analysis is utilised. This approach is designed to move beyond cataloguing general differences to identify specific accounts that carry significant implications for concepts of sacred space and covenantal continuity. The analytical lens is ‘constitutive’, viewing the Qurʾānic text as a document that affirms history to establish a theological and legal foundation for holy geography.

3.2. Data Collection

Primary narrative data was extracted through a focused comparison of the Masoretic Text of the Hebrew Bible (accessed via Sefaria.org) and the canonical text of the Qurʾān (accessed via Quran.com). Nine narrative episodes were selected as data points based on two strict criteria:

a) The biblical account attributes a moral, ritual, or leadership failure to a Prophet, which is narratively linked to a weakening of a territorial or covenantal standing.

b) The Qurʾānic account presents a divine revelation on prophetic infallibility and preserves their moral integrity.

3.3. Theoretical Framework and Analytical Procedure

The analysis is guided by the novel dual framework of ‘Narrative of Loss’ (Biblical) versus ‘Reality of Permanence’ (Qurʾānic). Each selected narrative pair was examined through the following questions:

a) How does the biblical version contribute to a theology where human sin leads to territorial forfeiture?

b) How does the Qurʾānic divine revelation convey an account of enduring Prophetic legitimacy and, by extension, the uninterrupted sanctity of associated spaces?

4. Results

The comparative analysis reveals a coherent pattern of narrative divergence. The Qurʾān consistently affirms Prophetic rectitude at precisely those points where Prophetic sin would undermine the legitimacy of leadership and the permanence of the divine promise.

Table 1. The Tanakh’s Narrative of Loss versus the Qurʾānic Declaration of Truth

ID	Narrative Core	Biblical Instantiation (Narrative of Loss)	Qurʾānic Declaration (Prophetic Integrity)	Implication for Sacred Space and Sovereignty
R1	The Covenant Heir	Conditional Genealogy: Isaac is explicitly named as the son to be sacrificed, binding the covenant promise to a specific bloodline (Genesis 22:2).	Meritocratic Submission: The son is referred to as a ‘forbearing boy,’ with obedience prioritised over named lineage (Ishmael is implied) (Qur’ān 37:101-102).	Removes ethnic exclusivity to the land’s promise, establishing a title deed based on faithful submission.
R2	Cultic Leadership	Failed Priesthood: Aaron is directly implicated in fabricating the Golden Calf, corrupting the central cultic worship (Exodus 32:35).	Exonerated Authority: Blame is shifted to ‘the Sāmirī’; Aaron is portrayed as pleading with his people but powerless to stop them (Qur’ān 20:85, 94).	Severs the link between leadership and defilement; preserves the purity of the prophetic office.
R3	Kingly Morality	Adulterous King: David intentionally commits adultery with Bathsheba and orchestrates her husband’s death (2 Samuel 11:4-5).	Tested Judge: David’s story becomes a parable of judicial error regarding a sheep, followed by immediate repentance. No adultery is mentioned (Qur’ān 38:24).	Vindicates the Davidic vicegerency (khilāfah) and the inherent sanctity of the capital, al-Quds.
R4	Foundational Sanctity	Idolatrous Founder: In old age, Solomon’s foreign wives turn his heart to idolatry, nullifying the piety of his foundational work (1 Kings 11:4).	Infallible Builder: A direct declaration: “It was not Solomon who disbelieved”, Any corruption is attributed to the devil’s teaching magic(Qur’ān 2:102).	The Master Proof. Declares the sanctuary perpetually pure, affirming it as an enduring masjid.
R5	Covenantal Inheritance	Universal Family Salvation: All of Noah’s sons board the ark and are saved, emphasising family continuity within the covenant (Genesis 7:7).	Conditional Salvation Based on Faith: One son refuses to board, chooses disbelief, and drowns (Qur’ān 11:42-43).	Confirms that the inheritance (wirāthah) of the land is contingent upon creedal alignment.
R6	Divine Military Mandate	Gideon’s Test: The judge Gideon subjects his army to a water test at God’s command (Judges 7:4).	Ṭālūt’s (Saul’s) Test: The identical test is attributed to the Qur’ānic king Ṭālūt, integrating it into Islam’s Prophetic history (Qur’ān 2:249).	Reclaims the history of divine election for the unbroken Islamic prophetic continuum.
R7	Prophetic Innocence	Single Function for Evidence: Joseph’s torn coat is used only by his brothers to deceive their father (Genesis 37:31).	Dual Vindication: The torn coat serves as evidence first for the brothers’ deception, and later to prove Joseph’s innocence against Potiphar’s wife (Qur’ān 12:18, 26-28).	Establishes the Prophet as an unassailable archetype of virtue and resilience.
R8	Prophetic Fate	Miraculous Transformation: Lot’s wife disobeys, looks back, and is supernaturally turned into a pillar of salt (Genesis 19:26).	Moral Alignment: She is stated to have perished among the other disbelievers in the city (Qur’ān 7:83).	Distinguishes the prophetic household based on spiritual truth, preserving prophetic separation.
R9	Symbol of the Potency	Senescent King: The elderly David is frail and impotent, requiring a young woman for warmth, symbolising a fading dynasty (1 Kings 1:1-2).	Perpetual Strength: David is commemorated as ‘the possessor of strength’ (dhu al-ayd) (Qur’ān 38:17).	Rejects symbols of weakness; projects the authority of the kingdom as eternally robust.

Accordingly, the collective import of these nine divine declarations demonstrates a comprehensive manifestation of the true prophetic record. Primarily, the Qurʾān protects the moral integrity of the Prophets (R2, R3, R4, R9) and simultaneously clarifies familial narratives to prioritise faith over mere bloodline (R1, R5, R8). Furthermore, the revelation situates accounts of divine testing within its own historical truth (R6, R7).

Consequently, this pattern articulates the doctrine of prophetic infallibility (ʿiṣmah) as the foundational reality of history. By establishing the sinless nature of the Prophets, the Qurʾān removes the premise that sacred sites were ever rendered “lost” or “ruined” due to human failings. Instead, it declares the reality of their continuous and eternal sanctity as places of prostration established by the righteous.

4.2 Analysis of Conceptual Distinctions: Judaism and Political Zionism 

The theological and historical foundations of the Islamic claim to sacred space, as outlined in the preceding analysis, engage with a specific interpretation of Jewish history and covenantal theology. To clarify the object of this engagement, it is essential to delineate the conceptual distinctions between historical, religious Judaism and modern political Zionism. The latter represents a significant ideological transformation that reconfigures traditional religious concepts into a secular nationalist project. The following table, constructed from the definitive historical entry on Zionism in The Jewish Encyclopedia (1906) systematically contrasts these two frameworks. This contrast is not polemical but analytical, providing the necessary context for understanding the rival ‘Narratives of Loss and Permanence’ discussed in this study.

Table 2: Conceptual Distinctions Between Historical Judaism and Modern Political Zionism. Reference: The Jewish Encyclopedia (1906)

Aspect	Judaism (Historical–Theological Tradition)	Zionism (Modern Political Ideology)
Historical Emergence and Nature	Developed over millennia as a religious civilisation structured around covenantal law (Halakha), ritual observance, and rabbinic interpretation, with origins in biblical narratives.	Emerged in late 19th-century Europe as a secular nationalist movement, specifically initiated by Theodor Herzl in 1896. It was a political response to antisemitism and shaped by contemporary European political thought. (‘Rise of Nationalist Sentiment,’ ‘Herzl’s “Judenstaat”).
Primary Orientation and Aim	Oriented toward religious law, spiritual continuity, and ethical obedience to divine commandments. The Land of Israel holds profound symbolic, covenantal, and eschatological significance within this framework.	Oriented toward political sovereignty, territorial control, and nation-state formation. It prioritises national self-determination and the creation of a ‘publicly and legally assured home’ (the Basel Program), often as a project distinct from religious ritual (‘The Basel Congress’).
Understanding of Exile (Galut)	Traditionally interprets exile as a divinely ordained spiritual condition, a theological state linked to sin and destined to endure until Messianic redemption. It is not a condition to be resolved solely by human political action (‘Relation to Messianism’).	Conceptualises exile as a socio-political abnormality and a problem of national vulnerability. It frames exile as a condition requiring active human rectification through organised migration, settlement, and political self-organisation (‘Herzl’s “Judenstaat”).
Mechanism of Return	The return to Zion is traditionally linked to divine initiative and Messianic fulfilment. It is conceived as an event of supernatural redemption, not a programme for mass political mobilisation (‘Relation to Messianism’).	Advocates for organised immigration (Aliyah) and settlement as legitimate, necessary, and urgent instruments of national revival and demographic consolidation (‘Present Condition of the Movement’).
Internal Opposition	Historically encompasses diverse theological schools but lacks a unified political programme centred on achieving pre-Messianic territorial sovereignty.	Faced and continues to face sustained opposition from segments of Orthodox Judaism, particularly (though not exclusively) before 1948, on theological grounds that reject a secular national redemption as a usurpation of divine prerogative (‘Protest of German Rabbis,’ ‘Internal Opposition’).
Historical Outcome	Sustained diasporic communities bound by a transnational religious law and identity over many centuries, with the land remaining a central focus of liturgy and longing.	Culminated in the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948 as a sovereign political entity, defining a new, territorial centre for Jewish national life (‘Present Condition of the Movement’).

5. Discussion 

The identified prophetic narrations are not isolated details but interconnected components within the Qurʾān that affirm the permanence of the divine covenant and the sacred spaces associated with it. This covenant, referred to in the Qurʾān as the Mīthāq, represents the solemn agreement between Allah and His messengers to uphold the pure message of monotheism and to sanctify the earth through righteous leadership.

5.1. Affirming the Spiritual Heritage of the Covenant (R1, R5, and R8)

The Biblical ‘Narrative of Loss’ is fundamentally tied to a particularist, genealogical understanding of the covenant. The Qurʾān, however, establishes that the divine promise is rooted in Islām (submission) rather than ethnic exclusivity. In the account of Abraham’s supreme test, the focus on the “forbearing boy” (R1) emphasises the merit of obedience. As noted by Afsar (2007), this re-centres the understanding of the covenant on spiritual devotion. This account implicitly affirms the Ishmaelite lineage as carriers of the original prophetic ethic, connecting it to the finality of the Prophet Muḥammad, peace be upon him. This reality is further clarified by the account of Noah’s son (R5), which demonstrates that salvation and inheritance are determined by faith, not by biology. Similarly, the account of Lot’s wife (R8) affirms that proximity to a Prophet provides no benefit without creedal alignment. Collectively, these narrations establish that the right to the Abrahamic legacy and its geographic heartland belongs to those who maintain the covenant of faith, a reality the Qurʾān positions the Islamic ummah as fulfilling.

5.2. Affirming the Chain of Prophetic Authority (R2, R3, R6, R7, and R9)

A second pillar of the ‘Narrative of Loss’ is the perceived corruption of the leadership chain itself. Within that framework, if the priests, judges, and kings chosen by God are portrayed as morally compromised, then the institutions and holy sites they establish are viewed as inherently flawed, justifying their eventual loss. However, the Qurʾān clarifies that the noble lineage of the Prophets is safeguarded from sins that could jeopardise their sacred mission. The affirmation of Aaron’s integrity (R2) is of paramount importance. As Rosshandler (2025) highlights, preserving the purity of the prophet is essential to maintain the sanctity of the worship system he leads; if Aaron had been involved in the fabrication of the calf, the holiness of the sanctuary would be irreparably tainted. In the Qurʾānic narrative, David’s story (R3) is understood through Hani’s (2020) framework of fitnah (divine testing), which reframes adversity not as a result of moral failure, but as a means of spiritual elevation. This protects the legitimacy of the Davidic vicegerency and, by extension, the holy city of Jerusalem. By commemorating David’s final years as a state of remembered strength (R9) rather than physical decay, the Qurʾān affirms an unbroken chain of sinless authority. Consequently, the divine covenant mediated by these Prophets was never legally or spiritually ruptured, ensuring the continuous validity of their sacred sites.

5.3. The Reality of Permanence: Solomon and the Status of Al-Aqṣā (R4)

All preceding prophetic accounts culminate in the foundational truth regarding Solomon (R4). Within the ‘Narrative of Loss,’ the portrayal of Solomon’s idolatry represents a failure that underpins the view of the Temple’s destruction as a divine judgment. In that tradition, the site is theologically categorised as a ḥorbah (ruin), a place of lost glory awaiting human or future reconstruction. The Qurʾān, however, explicitly declares that “It was not Solomon who disbelieved” (Qurʾān 2:102), an affirmation that executes a profound theological re-categorisation. This statement asserts the enduring validity of the Jerusalem sanctuary, affirming that because it was established by a righteous prophet, the space cannot be deemed “ruined” in a covenantal or spiritual context. It remains a masjid (a place of prostration) in a state of continuous sanctity.

This claim of a ‘permanent sanctuary’ finds historical support in a narrative of ‘restoration’ rather than ‘usurpation.’ As documented by Houk (2015), the Islamic arrival at the site under Caliph ʿUmar in 638 CE followed a nearly 500-year period of Roman and Byzantine neglect. During this time, the site was not an active temple but had been abandoned. Caliph ʿUmar’s personal oversight of its cleansing aligns with the theological view of the site as a permanently sacred Solomonic masjid. Furthermore, since the site had already served as the first direction of prayer (qiblah) for Muslims, their actions are framed as the physical restoration and sanctification of a site that they believed had been neglected by those who failed to recognise its true, enduring status.

6. Conclusion 

This study demonstrates that the Qurʾān’s narratives concerning the Prophets establish a foundational theological framework for understanding the permanence and inviolability of sacred space. By systematically affirming the absolute ‘iṣmah of the Prophets, the Qurʾān articulates a decisive counter-narrative to historiography that predicates territorial loss upon communal or leadership sin. The analysis reveals that the Qurʾān’s depiction of Prophetic figures serves not merely as moral exemplarity but as a constitutive theological argument: when the Prophets are righteous, the sanctuaries they founded are, by extension, perpetually sanctified.

The central contribution of this research is the identification and elaboration of a framework termed the ‘Reality of Permanence.’ This concept is crystallised in the Qurʾān’s definitive account of Solomon, which asserts, “It was not Solomon who disbelieved” (Qurʾān 2:102). This statement performs critical theological work by severing the conceptual link between the sanctuary’s founder and idolatry. Consequently, the al-Aqṣā sanctuary in Jerusalem (al-Quds) is not rendered a spiritually ‘ruined’ temple awaiting reconstruction but is affirmed as a perpetually valid masjid (place of prostration). This re-categorisation provides the immutable theological and juridical basis for the Islamic understanding of the site and the community’s role as its enduring custodian.

Ultimately, this research bridges a significant gap between scriptural hermeneutics and political theology. It demonstrates how the Qurʾān’s independent narrative project concerning prophetic integrity functions as a divine ‘title deed’ to sacred geography. By grounding the sanctity of land in the impeccability of its prophetic founders, the Qurʾān furnishes a self-contained rationale for sovereignty and custodianship that is intrinsic to its own revelation. This work thereby offers scholars of Islamic law, political theology, and sacred geography a novel analytical lens, moving beyond comparative polemics to reveal how Qurʾānic truth claims themselves architect the principles of sacred territorial sovereignty.

Acknowledgements 

This research did not receive any specific grant or financial support from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or non-profit sectors. The author expresses appreciation for the library and academic database resources offered by her institution, which were vital for completing this research. Additionally, the author sincerely acknowledges the foundational contributions of the scholars referenced herein, whose work serves as the basis for this article.

Author’s Contributions 

The author is the sole contributor to this manuscript. She was responsible for the study’s conceptualisation, the formulation of research objectives, and the execution of the doctrinal study. The entire research process, including analysis, authorship, and revision, was conducted independently.

Disclosure

The author declares no conflict of interest.

7. References 

Afsar, A. (2007). A Comparative Study of the Intended Sacrifice of Isaac/Ishmael in the Bible and the Qur’ān. Islamic Studies, 46(4), 483–498. https://www.jstor.org/stable/20839091

An, H. S. (2021). Saul, David, and Goliath in the Qurʾān (Q 2:246-251): Reading Taʾrīkh al-Ṭabarī with Al-Thaʿlabī and Al-Qurṭubī. Muslim-Christian Encounter, 14(2), 195–246. https://journal.kci.go.kr/mce/archive/articleView?artiId=ART002762290

Burgess, J. P. (2004). The Sacred Site in Civil Space: Meaning and Status of the Temple Mount/al-Haram al-Sharif. Social Identities, 10(3), 311–323. https://jpeterburgess.com/wp-content/uploads/publications/2004/2004_The_Sacred_Site_in_Civil_Space_Social_Identities_32004.pdf

Gottheil, R. (1906). Zionism. In The Jewish Encyclopedia (pp. 666–686). Funk & Wagnalls. https://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/15268-zionism#anchor1

Hani, S. S. (2020). The Problem of Evil: A Multifaceted Islamic Solution. Yaqeen Institute for Islamic Research. https://yaqeeninstitute.org.my/read/paper/the-problem-of-evil-a-multifaceted-islamic-solution

Houk, M. (2015). Dangerous Grounds at al-Haram al-Sharif: The Threats to the Status Quo. Jerusalem Quarterly, 63 & 64, 105–119. https://www.palestine-studies.org/sites/default/files/jq-articles/JQ_63_Dangerous_Grounds_at_al-haram_0.pdf

Jamal, N. (2023). Kitab tamadun Yahudi. Patriots Publishing Sdn. Bhd.

Lowin, S. L. (2011). Abraham in Islamic and Jewish Exegesis. Religion Compass, 5(6), 224–235. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-8171.2011.00274.x

Rosshandler, K. (2025). The Golden Calf between Bible and Qurʾan: Scripture, Polemic, and Exegesis from Late Antiquity to Islam: (by Michael E. Pregill). American Journal of Islam and Society, 42(1–2), 121–127. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.35632/ajis.v42i1-2.3665