The Enigma of the Messengers in Quran 36:14: A Critical Analysis of Divine Knowledge and Narrative Clarity

By Dr. Maxwell Shimba, Shimba Theological Institute

Abstract

Quran 36:14 describes a divine episode in which Allah claims to have sent two, and subsequently a third, messenger to a certain city. Yet, the Quran offers no explicit identification of these individuals or the city in question, despite asserting its own clarity and completeness. This article critically examines the ambiguity of this narrative, interrogates the implications for the purported omniscience and communicative transparency of Allah, and contrasts this episode with the narrative standards of Biblical and historical prophetic literature. The analysis ultimately challenges the Quranic claim to clarity (Quran 12:1, 16:89, 41:3) and highlights significant epistemic and hermeneutical deficiencies.

Introduction

Among the central claims of the Quran is its position as a "clear book" (kitābun mubīn, Quran 12:1), a revelation in "clear Arabic" intended to be a comprehensive guide to mankind (Quran 16:89). Yet, a close reading of many Quranic passages reveals notable narrative ambiguities and omissions, most starkly illustrated in the account of the messengers sent to a city in Surah Ya-Sin (Quran 36:13–14). This article investigates the lacunae in this account, particularly the lack of explicit identification of the prophets and the city, and examines the implications for the Quran’s claim to clarity and divine omniscience.

The Textual Problem: Quran 36:13–14

The passage in question reads:

"And set out to them a parable: the dwellers of the city, when there came messengers to them. When We sent to them two, but they denied them both, so We strengthened them with a third. They said, 'Indeed, we are sent to you.'"
(Quran 36:13–14)

Crucially, the Quran does not provide:

The names of the messengers.
The name of the city.
The historical context or time period.

This absence is remarkable given the Quran’s self-assertion as tibyān li-kulli shayʾ ("an explanation of all things," Quran 16:89).

Traditional Exegesis: Attempts to Fill the Gaps

Muslim exegetes (mufassirūn) have long grappled with this vagueness. The majority, including classical authorities such as Ibn Kathir, Al-Tabari, and Al-Qurtubi, relay speculative traditions (Isra’iliyyat), often borrowing from Christian sources. Some suggest the city is Antioch, and the messengers are disciples of Jesus (Barnabas, Paul, Peter, John, etc.). However, the Quran itself is silent on these specifics, and these interpretations are neither unanimous nor rooted in Quranic text.

The reliance on external, sometimes apocryphal, traditions raises methodological concerns:

Why must the “clear book” rely on non-Quranic sources for clarification?
Does this not betray a deficiency in the primary text?

Comparative Analysis: Biblical and Prophetic Narratives

In sharp contrast, the Biblical narrative—whether Old or New Testament—typically provides detailed accounts of prophets:

Names (e.g., Moses, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Jesus).
Geographic locations (Egypt, Israel, Nineveh, etc.).
Chronological and social contexts.

Such precision serves both historical and theological purposes, allowing for meaningful engagement and verifiability. The Quranic narrative in 36:14, by contrast, lacks these basic attributes of historical clarity.

The Problem of Omniscience and Clarity

If Allah is omniscient and wishes to communicate guidance “clearly,” the omission of essential details is problematic:

Epistemic Ambiguity:
The absence of names and location renders the passage unanchored, open to endless speculation, and ultimately functionally ambiguous.
Hermeneutical Uncertainty:
The requirement for extraneous tradition to fill gaps undermines the sufficiency of revelation. As Rippin (2001) observes, “the act of interpretation in Islam is often an act of supplementing rather than explaining.”
Theological Implications:
If divine knowledge is perfect, why does revelation obscure rather than elucidate? If clarity is the standard, why this narrative reticence?

Quranic Self-Contradiction

The Quran asserts,

“This is a clear Book” (Quran 12:1),
“We have not neglected in the Book a thing” (Quran 6:38),
“We have explained in detail every kind of example for mankind” (Quran 17:89).

Yet, in 36:14, it demonstrably neglects what would be considered essential narrative elements.

Discussion: The Weakness of the Claim to Clarity

The Quran’s persistent vagueness in passages such as 36:14 raises serious challenges to the claim of its communicative clarity and, by extension, the scope and reliability of Allah’s knowledge as expressed in the text. The divine message, so vital for guidance, is instead presented as an enigmatic parable whose specifics are irretrievable without extra-Quranic interpolation.

Scholarly Critique

Michael Cook (The Koran: A Very Short Introduction, 2000) notes the Quran’s “tendency to allude rather than narrate,” which renders much of its content inaccessible without prior knowledge or external sources.
Gabriel Said Reynolds (The Qur’an and Its Biblical Subtext, 2010) identifies this as a deliberate, if problematic, literary technique, one that often frustrates genuine understanding.

Conclusion

Quran 36:14 serves as a paradigmatic example of the epistemological and communicative weakness inherent in the Quranic revelation. By failing to identify the very individuals and city at the heart of the story, the Quran undermines its claim to clarity and completeness. This exposes an internal contradiction and questions the efficacy of divine knowledge as transmitted in the Islamic scripture.

Unless one is prepared to accept that the divine message is intentionally obscurantist, the logical inference is that Allah’s knowledge—at least as rendered in the Quran—is insufficiently clear, leaving the purportedly guided audience in ambiguity rather than certainty.

References

The Quran (36:13–14, 12:1, 16:89, 41:3, 6:38, 17:89)
Al-Tabari, Tafsir al-Tabari
Ibn Kathir, Tafsir al-Quran al-Azim
Michael Cook, The Koran: A Very Short Introduction (Oxford, 2000)
Gabriel Said Reynolds, The Qur’an and Its Biblical Subtext (Routledge, 2010)
Andrew Rippin, The Blackwell Companion to the Qur’an (Blackwell, 2001)
The Bible (various references)

Dr. Maxwell Shimba
Shimba Theological Institute

Monday, July 7, 2025