The issue of the infallibility of the divine prophets (peace be upon them) is one of the fundamental components of the theology of prophethood in Islam and plays a crucial role in establishing the authority and acceptance of the divine message. Belief in infallibility, in addition to ensuring the integrity of the reception, preservation, and transmission of revelation, provides the basis for rational and reassuring obedience to the prophets in various dimensions of human life. According to Qur’anic and rational propositions, both intellectual and practical infallibility are among the characteristics of the divine messengers (peace be upon them). Nevertheless, some verses of the Holy Qur’an attribute to Prophet Abraham (peace be upon him) certain actions or statements that, at first glance, appear inconsistent with his intellectual and practical infallibility. The present article adopts an analytical-comparative approach and, through an examination of the foundations and methods of responding to these issues, investigates the views of two thinkers from two different intellectual schools: al-Sharif al-Murtada, an early theologian, and Ayatollah Javadi Amoli, a contemporary philosopher, in addressing four central objections concerning polytheism, falsehood, doubt in divine power, and inability to reason. The findings indicate that both thinkers affirm the complete infallibility of Khalil al-Rahman (peace be upon him) and regard infallibility as gradational; however, they differ in their theoretical foundations and methodological approaches. Al-Sharif al-Murtada, relying on the “theory of divine grace” and proceeding at the level of proof (maqām al-ithbāt), adopts a negative approach. By contrast, Ayatollah Javadi Amoli, drawing on the “theory of the spiritual faculty” and proceeding at the level of ontological reality (maqām al-thubūt), employs “intra-textual contextual analysis” and an analysis of the prophet’s ontological degrees to provide a positive explanation of the compatibility of the verses with the existential perfections of Prophet Abraham (peace be upon him). The conclusion is that these two approaches are not rivals but rather constitute two complementary levels of the doctrine of infallibility.