The paradox of mankind's creation and a self-sufficient deity

Quran claimed that Allah created mankind for His worship.

Quran 51:56:

I have not created the jinns and mankind except to worship Me.”

It also says:

Quran 11:2: ‏

"Allah, the Eternally-Self-Sufficient/Independent-of-All (Himself in no need of anything)”

However, when an entity starts to demand worship, it suggests a need, introducing an element of necessity. This contradicts the essence of an all-powerful being, as such a being wouldn't require anything; no worship, no acknowledgement of its existence, no prayers, no fasting month, and so forth. Consequently, this being cannot maintain the attribute of al-Samad (ٱلصَّمَدُ), indicating eternal self-sufficiency and independence from all.

Muslims often justify this by saying Allah does not need anything from us but we need Him.

Quran 35:15:

“O humanity! It is you who stand in need of Allah, but Allah ˹alone˺ is the Self-Sufficient, Praiseworthy.”

Yet, he is the one making demands (under the threat of eternal torture) to mankind.

Why do we need him? So he can spare our lives in the very machinery he himself put in place? We did not choose any of this. We have been made despite our consent, we are being put through a test we didn’t agree to, making choices he already knows and the endgame is written aeons before we were born.

Sahih al-Bukhari 1362 Book 23, Hadith 115:

(The Prophet said): "There is none among you, and not a created soul, but has place either in Paradise or in Hell assigned for him and it is also determined for him whether he will be among the blessed or wretched." A man said, "O Allah's Messenger (ﷺ)! Should we not depend on what has been written for us and leave the deeds as whoever amongst us is blessed will do the deeds of a blessed person and whoever amongst us will be wretched, will do the deeds of a wretched person?" The Prophet said, "The good deeds are made easy for the blessed, and bad deeds are made easy for the wretched."

Allah guides whom he wills but not only, some people are born to go in hell.

Quran 7:178-179:

“Whom Allah doth guide,- he is on the right path: whom He rejects from His guidance,- such are the persons who perish. Many are the Jinns and men we have made for Hell “

Quran 32:13:

Had We willed, We could have easily imposed guidance on every soul. But My Word will come to pass: I will surely fill up Hell with jinn and humans all together.

Allah is making humans (and jinns) solely designed for hell, how does this correlate with an all-just God?


Allah's desire for worship suggests narcissistic motives

A sense of self-centeredness arises if we consider the notion that Allah might condemn people to eternal hellfire simply for not acknowledging Him as the true creator, regardless of their sincere intentions. Many kind-hearted individuals born into non-Muslim families contribute positively to humanity, yet their virtuous deeds would be deemed meaningless, leading to eternal suffering.

This perception becomes stronger when one believes that individuals, even if they acknowledge Allah as the creator, would encounter severe and brutal punishment in the afterlife for failing to worship Him properly five times a day.

Let's not forget that Allah causes the death of newborns and imposes severe disabilities on innocent children as a means to instruct other humans to worship Him correctly or test their faith. Is this anything other than a spiteful attempt to compel helpless inferior beings to plead for mercy and feed on their desperation?

Finally, this narcissism is reinforced if we accept the Islamic story where angels are compelled to worship Allah without any free will, further emphasizing a self-centered desire for adoration.


The TEST (i.e. first recognising Allah and then worshipping him) is comparable to gambling

Muslims often refer to life as a gift and the test as a small price to pay to continue existing in a celestial utopia. But think this through for a second, if you had the choice between taking the test (considering the risk of eternal torture) or not existing at all (avoiding the prospect of eternal torture), what would you choose? I’m not sure about you but I’d rather not exist and avoid irredeemable suffering. No amount of joy derived from existence would make me even consider it.

If Allah is against gambling and interest because high risk isn't worth a high reward, then why does Allah force us to take this test for a high reward and high risk?

One could argue that it's different because we have control over our choices but it simply cannot be true even if we forget about determinism for a second. Factors depending on cheer luck are rigging the game such as geographic location, upbringing, culture, social environment, personal experiences, political and societal factors, access to knowledge, educational and intellectual influences (and according to Islam, you have to deal with the influence of a literal evil entity whispering in your ears.)

All of these factors will undeniably impact how we process and assess information. We are not responsible for what compels us, for what makes sense to us and speaks to us. Even after reading the Quran and its explanatory scriptures a thousand times with the most open mind, one might still find it entirely devoid of logic, scientifically implausible, and, at best, horrendous, and at worst, an insult to human intellect.


Human mind vs infinity

Human experience is inherently finite, and our understanding is limited by the temporal nature of our existence. Eternal consequences exist outside the scope of our everyday experiences, making it impossible to fully grasp their magnitude. The human mind often struggles with conceptualizing infinity and eternity. Concepts like eternal punishment are abstract and exceed our cognitive capacities.

This explains partly why humans keep sinning and the threat of hell fails to embody an efficient deterring strategy. If we were equipped to grasp such great scales which is incomparable to anything we know, no human with a minimum of self-preservation instincts, would consciously commit sins.

The opposition typically uses the following as a counterargument:

Sahih Muslim 2749 Book 50, Hadith 13:

"By Him in Whose Hand is my life, if you were not to commit sin, Allah would sweep you out of existence and He would replace (you by) those people who would commit sin and seek forgiveness from Allah, and He would have pardoned them. " 

Humans sin despite the prospect of hell because Allah wouldn't want a world without sinners, he made us imperfect for that very reason. The key point here is repentance, that's what God thrives for. We are to understand that our propensity to sin overrides our self-preservation instincts. Knowing that repentance doesn't necessarily guarantee forgiveness, how does one reconcile this with an all-just God?

In other words, we are forced to take a test without having all the necessary tools to go through it all the while being highly disadvantaged by our very nature. The outcome of failing the test transcends our understanding and is factually disproportionate given the finite constitution of a sin.


Mankind’s existence VS its creation

Why would Allah want to be worshipped, especially by a creature He Himself created? Didn't He already achieve recognition from jinns and angels? Sure, angels, often compared to drones, don't have free will and must unquestionably obey Allah but if the goal was to create beings with free will, why not give angels that autonomy? Why specifically design humans? And considering that Jinns, like the rebellious Iblis, have free will, why not grant angels a similar capacity for choice instead of creating mankind?

The notion of "test (i.e. recognising Allah and then worshipping him)" enters the narrative ONLY after the creation of humans, leaving a void in the inherent reason for their creation. Put more simply, there's no explanation as to why humans were made in the first place. Believers often resort to expressions like "God's mysterious ways" or "humans can't comprehend a deity's plan" to address the lack of answers in this area.

Theists criticize science for not tackling the "why" of our existence. Science focuses on the "how" and has been successful in providing the beginning of a provable answer while having the humility to admit what it doesn't know (yet). Religions, on the other hand, claim to possess all the answers, yet they fall short on the most crucial ones.


The paradox of creationism

We are to believe that mankind was sent down to Earth following Iblis's deception. Indeed, Adam and Eve were led by Iblis to eat from the forbidden tree and disobey Allah's command.

There's a cause and an effect in this story: God creates humans  angels bow → Iblis refuses to bow and betrays Allah leads Adam and Eve astray  Allah sends them to Earth as a consequence of their disobedience.

Note: this burden was placed upon every person who has existed, regardless of their complete lack of involvement in the disobedience of Adam and Eve. Is it fair to hold individuals responsible for the wrongdoings of their peers? Human diversity is vast, and the human mind is incredibly complex and variable. Another person in the situation of Adam and Eve might have resisted the temptation and chosen not to consume the forbidden fruit.

This leads to the following; there cannot be any situation of cause and effect within the prism of an omniscient and omnipotent God. It's not possible to betray a God by definition and nothing can happen without his knowledge.

This would imply that God orchestrated a series of theatricals displaying individuals as mere puppets to whom a role has been assigned and predetermined their fate to a horrifying and excruciating place that He personally created for eternal physical torment.

Note: he also created another place where these same puppets would be at last deprived of the last bits of their alleged free will because Allah will remove all the negative feelings and emotions which characterize a human being.


Allah’s failure to spread his message

According to Islamic scriptures, God sent numerous prophets across different historical periods and nations, spanning the globe. Despite previous messengers, humanity tended to revert to polytheism or altered the scriptures. In response, God sent a final prophet, offering one last opportunity for humanity to embrace His message.

So we are to understand that:

  1. Most religions that existed until today were once Islam

  2. Islam got corrupted by mankind every single time

  3. Islam either remained monotheistic but heavily altered (Atenism, Zoroastrianism, Judaism, Christianity, etc) or ended up with some form of polytheism

  4. Muhammad was the very last attempt for God to spread his message

There are several problems with this narrative.

  1. The alteration of scriptures suggests that there was an original version at some point in history. If the message was sent to all of humanity repeatedly, civilizations with well-preserved histories should possess remnants of the original text or cultural relics. Why is there a lack of material or cultural evidence supporting this claim? For instance, Chinese lore, the oldest recorded civilization (5000 years), differs significantly from Middle Eastern lore. Another inconsistency arises when considering scriptural accounts of a great flood during Moses' time; ancient civilizations like China appear untouched during that period and continued to progress without evident impact or records of such global events.

  2. Assuming that China had once received the message and subsequently altered it, embracing polytheism, how is it possible that it bears no resemblance to Islam, while Arab paganism exhibits many similarities? It is evident that these regions evolved differently, cultivating distinct cultures and beliefs.

  3. If Islam was sent before and eventually underwent tampering, it implies that it initially spread. Wasn't the test concluded the moment Islam vanished completely?

  4. Suppose Allah, in His great mercy, decided to grant mankind a thousand additional chances; what is that even supposed to mean? We as humans are not judged unanimously as one entity; only the disbelievers (or sinners) possibly go to hell. So, what's the purpose of repeatedly resetting the test? Is the ultimate goal a planet of Muslims? We know this won't happen because the scriptures prophesize that Islam will once again disappear, leading to Judgment Day. There's a clear contradiction here: Allah judges individuals but resets the test as if humans were a monolith and failed the test all together at once. One might argue that Allah wanted more humans to undergo the test, but it's explicitly stated that the test is reset because mankind failed it. In a test, some succeed, some fail, and making new generations retake the test due to some of their ancestors' failures makes no sense.

  5. Doesn't the recurring failure of the message each time it was sent suggest a flawed system that is continually replaced or altered due to its own deficiencies? Doesn't this indicate that it is not humans who are consistently failing, but rather Allah who is incompetent in spreading his message? If, over several decades and across different generations, most students consistently failed to pass a particular course, wouldn't it lead you to question the teacher's teaching capability, his educational approach or the overall school's program?

  6. Islam conforms to familiar patterns of evolving religions, marked by early divisions into various branches. Following its leader's demise, Shia Muslims emerged rather instantly. Later on, numerous schools, and subcategories such as the Mutazilites, sects, coranists and whatnot proliferated. Another notable evolution is seen in language; literary Arabic differs from spoken Arabic, posing challenges in interpretation. I will not mention the missing verses pointed out in the hadiths or the existence of different versions of the Quran which directly contradicts the premise of its perfect preservation (or will I?). Nevertheless, the observable aspects of Islamic doctrine do not align with its final and unalterable attributes.


Repeating a failed strategy

If Allah's motive was to test creatures with free will into believing in him, wouldn’t the most efficient way to do so by showing Himself?

If his motive was to test creatures with free will into believing in him without any observable evidence, why would he transgress that rule and show Himself to one particular human being? Wouldn’t it mean that the test is about our capacity to believe in another human being rather than in God himself? After all, prophets are always self-proclaimed, there are never witnesses of their experiences, never any tangible evidence, are we to believe in one human’s word however convincing it might be?

Allah failing to bring His message to humanity time and time again defeats the very essence of an all-powerful being. A God, by definition, cannot fail. Not only did He fail countless times, but He kept using the same counter-productive method, which is to reveal Himself to one man and expect the rest of humanity to believe in this man permanently even after his death.

It is to be noted that in comparison, Iblis has a direct way to communicate with humans GLOBALLY since he can whisper in their ear until the end of times.


The problem with an eternal God in relation to the Universe

If Allah is eternal, why did He create the universe only 13.8 billion years ago? Additionally, if Allah expressed the desire to be worshipped around the same time, could it be speculated that He was eternally existent but became bored only recently, creating a game with mankind and Satan as characters for His amusement? This notion doesn't make sense because, as the all-powerful designer, Allah knows all outcomes, and boredom contradicts the idea of a perfect and omnipotent being.

Why does Allah specifically show concern for Earth, particularly for mankind, who, according to Islam, is believed to have arrived only 6000 years ago (or a bit more, if you're inclined to engage in some mathematical gymnastics) . With billions of stars in our galaxy alone and billions of galaxies in the universe, what is the purpose behind creating such an immense cosmos? Despite the anticipation of the arrival of the Mahdi in Islamic traditions, the focus turns towards Doomsday rather than exploring space.

These reflections prompt questioning the purpose of such a vast universe and raise doubts about whether this God is a creation of human imagination—a man-made concept.



If there is a God, what motivated the creation of humanity? Was it an outcome of divine boredom, which would contradict the notion of self-sufficiency, or was it part of a predetermined plan which humans aren't equipped cognitively to comprehend?

If our freedom to shape our destinies ultimately doesn't belong to us, can we really aspire to anything as humans? What is the true essence of paradise? Does it entail perpetual indulgence in sensual pleasures and the removal of human emotions considered "negative"? (This assumption is flawed by the way, as every facet of human emotion is valid and integral to our identity, shaped by evolution and adaptation to our environment.) What does the concept of hell entail? Is it a place where God, a being believed to be beyond all imperfections, stoops to employ primitive and barbaric methods of punishment, methods that we, as a species, have collectively deemed immoral as we became more civilized?

The question of our existence is imbued with simplicity: life emerged from conditions that were sufficiently conducive, with the intricate process of evolution and chance playing significant roles. Human evolution, supported by evidence like fossils, genetics, and artefacts, tells a compelling story of the gradual transformation from our prehistoric ancestors to the complex beings we are today.

Religions, it appears, were established not just to address existential questions but also to gain power, impose personal will and unify humans under one system. This strategy has proven successful over time, especially considering the gaps in our understanding of the natural world.

However, as science has advanced, it has increasingly contradicted many religious statements. If there was a God who sent prophets, one might argue that this deity should have possessed knowledge of these scientific truths thousands of years ago, yet most of the knowledge from the scriptures correlates with what they knew during their own time.

This observation lends weight to the idea that religions are rooted in the knowledge and understanding of people from specific historical periods.

Credit: This article is written by TheRoadOfDespair