We have to set the STANDARDS First

Before we look at the question of why we were created, we need to establish some ground rules. Without clear standards, a discussion can never lead to any real conclusion.

First, let's look at the reality of the world we live in today. Allah does not appear to us. His angels do not show up. And Allah does not perform any miracles today like the massive spectacles he claims to have shown earlier generations. Yet, despite this absolute silence, we are still demanded to believe in Him. How are we supposed to do that? Islam itself tells us to use our reason, intellect, and common sense to examine its teachings. Very well. Let us accept that invitation. Let our reason and common sense be the absolute standard by which we judge this entire question of why we were created.

Second, we must understand the nature of supernatural claims. Muhammad made many grand claims about receiving messages from the heavens. By their very nature, these stories cannot be physically proven. But here is the problem: any person (i.e. whether a true prophet or a false fraud) can make an unprovable claim about hearing God.

So, how can our common sense separate truth from falsehood? The answer is simple: look at the substance of the message. If a message truly comes from an all-wise, perfect God, it will show flawless supreme wisdom and perfect logic. It will make sense. But if a religion relies on circular excuses, avoids direct questions, and hides behind contradictions, then it bears the unmistakable marks of a human-made religion.

Let us begin and see if the answer by Muhammad and his Allah of the question "Why Creation" actually have any supreme wisdom and justice, or if the Quran, Hadith, and later apologists are just using circular excuses to mask this very basic question.

Table of Contents:

Part 1: The Unanswered "Why"

"Why is there something rather than nothing?" This is perhaps the most profound question to haunt human consciousness. When we turn to Islamic theology for an answer, however, we encounter a web of contradictions. The deeper we examine the Islamic narrative of creation, the more it clashes with the supposed nature of its deity.

To unravel this, we must distinguish between two fundamentally different questions that Islamic theology constantly conflates:

1. The Pre-Creation Motive: What was the "trigger" that moved an eternal, self-sufficient being to initiate creation in the first place?
2. The Post-Creation Assignment: What tasks or functions were assigned to creation after it already existed?

The "Worship" Deflection:

Muhammad/Allah themselves attempted to answer the "Why" (the motivation before creation) by citing the "What" (the assignment after creation). This is a categorical error.

When asked about the purpose of existence, Allah gave the answer in the following verse:

"I did not create jinn and humans except to worship Me." (Quran 51:56)

And now Islamic apologists present this as the ultimate answer to human existence, but it is a logical deflection. This verse provides a job description, not a pre-creation motive. It tells us what humans are expected to do once they are already here, but it entirely fails to explain what compelled Allah to create them in the first place.

Islamic theology offers nothing beyond circular reasoning. Worship is the purpose because Allah said so. Allah said so because it is the purpose. The argument rotates endlessly around its own axis without ever moving forward.

However, when pressed further, then Islamic apologist had to admit the truth that:

• Allah neither provided the underlying motivation for creation,

• Nor did Allah tell the reason for not telling it.

Therefore, the questions are:

1. Why didn't Allah tell it? 
2. Was Allah "unable" to answer it while there exist no Allah in heavens and Muhammad was making the religion on his own, and as a human of 7th century he had no answer to it?

An all-knowing God, dictating the final and complete revelation to humanity, had every opportunity to explain the underlying motivation for creation. He did not. That silence is not a mystery to be accepted with reverence. It is a gap that no amount of scholarly interpretation has ever successfully filled, because the question it leaves open is one that only a genuine creator with a genuine motivation could answer.

Apologists' Excuse 1: Worship is only for  "Benefit for Humans"

When confronted with this, Muslim scholars attempt a quick patchwork explanation. They say that worship does not benefit Allah, and that it is simply for our own good to get us into Paradise.

This only complicates the failure further for two main reasons.

First, if worship is solely for our benefit, then the statement "I created them except to worship Me" becomes misleading.

Instead, then it should have said, "I created them to reward/benefit them."

However, in this verse, the target of the worship is explicitly Allah. If it were 100 percent for human benefit, the verse would say "to benefit you" or "to reward you." But it does not.

Furthermore, this defense leads to an absurd theological contradiction. Allah creates beings solely to worship Him, yet claims He gains nothing from their worship. This is akin to claiming, "I am eating, even though I have no need for food," or "I am sleeping, despite having no need for rest." Action without need implies a psychological compulsion, not divine perfection.

Ultimately, apologists are forced to admit that Allah's answer relies entirely on a non-sequiter, i.e. question was asked about underlying motivation for Creation, but the answer of "to worship me" by Allah is only a deflection and it does not answer the original question. The response remains a complete mismatch to the question asked.

Apologists' Excuse 2: The "Divine Attributes" Fallacy: 

Muslim scholars also present the following argument for creation (al-Islam.org): 

Allah’s perfection includes creativity (al-Khaliq), mercy, and generosity. Creation is an expression of these attributes, not a response to need or deficiency. "

Our Response:

This argument still does not answer the fundamental questions:

1. Firstly, why does a self-sufficient al-Samad God need attributes at all? It makes no sense. He should be complete even without any attributes. 

2. And secondly, why does He need to express them? Again, He should be complete and perfect even without expressing those attributes. 

3. And to whom does He want to express these attributes? To insignificant and lowly creatures (i.e. humans) which He brought into existence himself? This makes no sense. 

Please ask these questions to yourself:

1. Would Allah cease to exist without these attributes?

2. Would He cease to exist without the desire to express them?

3. Would He cease to exist without creating something (i.e. humans, jinns, angels etc.) outside Himself to receive them so that they could these attributes could be expressed?

Beyond all of this, perhaps the most telling point is that this entire philosophical framework does not appear anywhere in the Quran or authenticated Sunnah. It was constructed by later scholars who recognized the logical gap in the creation narrative and worked backward to fill it. If this were the true reason for creation, an all-knowing God would have stated it clearly in His own revelation. Instead, He left it unexplained, and human beings spent centuries building philosophical scaffolding around a silence that should not exist in the book of an all-knowing God.

Apologists' Excuse 3: Allah does not need to tell us why He created us

At this stage, Islamic apologists come up with the following two excuses:

1. Allah does not need to tell us why He created us.
2. And even if Allah told it, we could not comprehend it.

Our Response: 

First, it is worth acknowledging what this admission actually concedes. Islamic apologists are openly stating that Allah neither explained why He created us, nor explained why He chose not to explain it. That is a significant silence from a being described as all-knowing and all-communicating.

Second, this position creates a direct contradiction at the heart of Islamic theology. Islam consistently invites humanity to use reason and intellect to recognize Allah. The Quran repeatedly calls on people to reflect, to observe, and to think. But the moment a sincere and honest question arises from that very intellect, we are told that our minds are too limited to receive the answer.

You cannot invite someone to use a tool and then punish them for using it. Encouraging intellect and then dismissing its conclusions as incomprehension is not a theological position. It is a way of avoiding accountability.

Third, and perhaps most tellingly, this silence has a simpler explanation. If Muhammad had no answer to why Allah created the universe and humanity, it may not be because the answer is beyond human comprehension. It may simply be because Muhammad himself did not know. A human being speaking from his own limited understanding would naturally be unable to answer a question that has no answer within that framework.

Finally, if any claim about God cannot be questioned, tested, or explained, then it becomes indistinguishable from every other unverifiable claim ever made about every other god. Without clear answers to fundamental questions, there is no logical basis for preferring one claim over another. They all rest equally on assertion, and assertion alone is not evidence.

Part 2: al-Samad, the Cruel Test, and the Test of Praise

The Paradox of al-Samad (Self-Sufficiency):

The problem becomes a full-blown contradiction when we examine one of the core attributes of the Islamic deity: al-Samad.

Quran 112:2: "Allah, the Eternal, the Absolute (al-Samad)."

Al-Samad implies perfection, zero deficiency, and absolute independence. A being that is al-Samad has no needs, no desires, and nothing to gain.

This leads to an inescapable logical failure: How can a being who needs nothing, he starts desiring and demanding worship? The moment a deity desires praise, recognition, or obedience, the illusion of self-sufficiency breaks. A truly perfect, self-sufficient being does not require affirmation from humans, jinn, or even atoms (i.e., insignificant and lowly creatures that He himself created). The act of commanding worship suggests a deficiency, and a "desire" that was unfulfilled before the command was given.

Apologists' Excuse 4: Our Parents also gave birth to us without asking us first

The Islamist Argument:

"Just as our parents gave birth to us without asking our permission, Allah created us without our consent. If you don't blame your parents, why blame Allah?"

Our Response: 

There is a fundamental difference between human parents and Allah.

Human parents are subject to natural instincts, biological drives, and social pressures. They may desire children out of love, loneliness, cultural expectation, or the fear of growing old without companionship. These are understandable, deeply human motivations rooted in need and emotion.

Muslims, however, describe Allah as al-Samad, completely self-sufficient and free from all need. If Allah desires something, that desire implies incompleteness. If He acts to fulfill something, that fulfillment implies a prior deficiency. Both contradict the very definition of al-Samad.

This is what makes the comparison hollow. We can explain why human parents bring children into existence without asking them first, because human parents have needs, fears, and desires that make such a decision understandable, even if imperfect. But Allah, by Muslim definition, has none of these. He needs nothing, lacks nothing, and is affected by nothing.

So the question remains unanswered. If Allah is truly al-Samad, what motivated the creation of the universe and humanity? Neither Allah in the Quran nor Muslim scholars have ever provided a satisfying answer. And borrowing an analogy from human parenthood, a condition defined entirely by need and dependency, only makes the problem more visible, not less.

The Problem of "Cruel Test" and the Problem of "Unjust Design"

If creation does not benefit Allah, and the only goal was to benefit humanity, then the entire structure of Islamic theology raises a devastating question: Why create a cruel test in this world followed by cruel eternal punishment in the next? Why subject billions of human beings to lifetimes of disease, poverty, grief, and tragedy just to reach a destination that an all-powerful creator could have placed them in instantly?

This brings us directly to the problem of an unjust design. The Quran itself shatters the idea that this system is designed for human benefit. In fact, it explicitly states that the vast majority of creation was engineered for damnation:

Quran 7:179: "And surely, We have created majority of the Jinn and mankind for Hell."

Quran 32:13: "If We had willed, We could have given every soul its guidance, but the word from Me will come true: I will fill Hell with jinn and mankind together."

This is not a system of universal benefit. It looks more like a cosmic slaughterhouse where the majority of human beings are explicitly designed to fail.

Furthermore, this design goes completely against our basic sense of justice by demanding infinite eternal punishment for a finite, limited amount of time spent on Earth. If our human reason is the judge, then punishing someone for trillions of years because of mistakes made in a short human lifespan of sixty or seventy years is infinitely unjust.

Now, ask your own reason and intellect: Does this explanation show supreme, flawless wisdom and justice? Or was Muhammad simply instilling terror into the hearts of people using the fear of eternal hellfire? By making people terrified of hell, he ensured they would become loyal servants who would never find the courage to question his personal commands.

Why a Test of PRAISING Allah? 

If life is truly a test, then shouldn't that test be about kindness, justice, compassion, and helping those in need? Shouldn't it be about resisting oppression, standing up for the weak, and making the world a better place?

But Allah tells us something else. It tells us that the ultimate test is to worship and praise Allah five times a day, every single day, without fail. Not because it improves the world. Not because it helps humanity. But simply because Allah demands it.

And this obsession with praise does not stop with humans.

According to Islam, angels have been endlessly worshipping and glorifying Allah since the beginning of time. They do not sin. They do not question. Yet they spend their entire existence in submission and praise. And for what? They are not going to paradise. They receive no reward of 72 houris. We are told Allah does not need their praise, yet He demands it endlessly. How is that different from someone insisting on being constantly applauded while claiming they do not care for attention?

Imagine someone saying, “I do not need food,” while continuing to eat non-stop. That is the same contradiction we are presented with. Allah supposedly needs nothing, yet He created a universe where everything exists just to praise Him.

It does not stop with angels either. The Quran claims that every creature, animals, birds, insects, even the stars and mountains, they all are engaged in praising Allah. From the vast galaxies to the tiniest atom, everything is glorifying Him. And yet none of these things will enter paradise. None will be rewarded. Their worship is never acknowledged.

Why?

What kind of being would create an entire universe just so it can be endlessly praised by every particle within it? What does Allah gain from this chorus of eternal worship? If He gains nothing, then why demand it? Why insist on it so obsessively?

This relentless demand for worship looks less like divinity and more like human ego projected onto the heavens. A god created in man's image, reflecting human flaws like the need for validation, praise, and submission.

It makes you wonder: Did Allah create man, or did man create Allah?

Because the Allah described in Islamic texts carries the same fragile pride and hunger for attention that we find in the most insecure of human rulers.

And if that is the god we are supposed to worship, then maybe the real test is not about obedience, but about the courage to question.

Apologists' Excuse 5: “Worship Is About Moral Development”

A common response to the critique of divine praise is to redefine "worship." Proponents argue that worship is not for the benefit of Allah, but for the moral development of the human being. They claim that rituals like Salat are tools designed to instill justice, gratitude, discipline, and charity, ultimately transforming the individual into a better member of society.

Our Response: 

Firstly, the development of moral character is not a uniquely religious achievement. Every human society, religious or not, has independently produced ethical frameworks centered on justice, compassion, honesty, and social responsibility.

Confucianism built an entire civilization of moral discipline without a personal God. Buddhism and Taoism guided hundreds of millions toward ethical living without demanding ritual praise of a creator. And today, the largely secular societies of Northern Europe, Japan, and South Korea consistently rank among the most honest, peaceful, and well-functioning in the world, without any theology behind their moral frameworks.

This tells us something important. Moral teaching and worship are two separate things. Morality is a universal human necessity. Worship, specifically the ritualized glorification of a divine being, is something else entirely. The two should not be conflated.

Secondly, if the genuine purpose of Islamic worship were human moral transformation, we would expect the most emphasized rituals to reflect that. We would expect acts of service, justice, empathy, and integrity to sit at the very center of the faith.

But that is not what we find.

The most central and non-negotiable act of Islamic worship is Salat, five daily prayers, each one mandatory, each one a structured ritual of pure glorification. Reciting Allahu Akbar (Allah is the Greatest), affirming His exclusive Lordship in Surah Al-Fatiha, bowing and prostrating in physical submission. These are acts of recognition and exaltation, not acts of social justice or charity.

Now consider this. A person could be the most honest, generous, and compassionate human being on earth, and in Islamic theology, they are still considered a sinner if they do not perform these specific daily affirmations of Allah's greatness.

If moral transformation were truly the goal, why would the absence of praise, rather than the absence of good character, be the defining line between salvation and damnation?

Thirdly, Islam also teaches that angels, animals, insects, trees, mountains, and every particle of the universe is in a constant state of worship, glorifying Allah at all times. None of these beings require moral development. None of them will be judged, rewarded, or sent to paradise.

Yet they worship.

If the purpose of worship is moral transformation, why does it extend to beings who have no morality to build? The only consistent explanation is that the worship of all creation serves a single function: the continuous acknowledgment of Allah's greatness, regardless of who or what is doing the acknowledging.

Fourthly, perhaps the most revealing test of any system is what it punishes.

In Islam, neglecting Salat carries severe consequences, including in classical jurisprudence the possibility of execution, and in theology the threat of eternal hellfire. This punishment applies even to a person of outstanding moral character who simply does not perform the verbal and physical acts of glorification.

Ask yourself honestly. If a truly self-sufficient being gains nothing from praise, why does the failure to offer that praise result in horrific eternal punishment? Why would a lifetime of perfect moral behaviour fail to compensate for the absence of ritualized glorification?

If a human authority figure demanded constant verbal affirmation of their greatness from those beneath them, and threatened severe punishment for those who refused even if those people were otherwise kind and ethical, we would not hesitate to recognize that as a need for ego-validation and control.

Calling the same pattern of behaviour "divine wisdom" does not change its nature. It simply places it beyond question by attaching a sacred label to it.

Part 3: Timing, Dinosaurs, and Paradise

If Allah Is Eternal, Why Did He DECIDE to Create the Universe ONLY 13.8 Billion Years Ago?

If Allah is truly eternal, existing without beginning or end, then why did He choose to create the universe only 13.8 billion years ago? What was He doing before that? Was He silently watching nothingness for an eternity, only to suddenly decide it was time to create a universe, a planet, a species, and a divine drama?

Islamic theology has no satisfying answer to this. Any answer either introduces change into an unchanging being, which destroys the concept of a perfect God, or admits that creation was somehow always necessary, which destroys the concept of a self-sufficient God. There is no clean exit from this dilemma.

We now know that the observable universe contains over two trillion galaxies. Each galaxy holds hundreds of billions of stars. Many of those stars have planets. Entire worlds are being born and destroyed every second. Stars larger than our entire solar system are exploding at this very moment.

And yet, according to Islamic theology, the focus of the creator of all this is a single species, on a single planet, in an unremarkable corner of one average galaxy. Not their civilizations, not their scientific discoveries, not their journey toward the stars. But whether they pray five times a day, and what they do in their bedrooms.

This is not the behaviour we would expect from the architect of a universe spanning 93 billion light-years. It is the behaviour we would expect from a deity imagined by people who believed their patch of desert was the center of everything, because they had no way of knowing otherwise.

When we step back and look honestly at the priorities, obsessions, and worldview reflected in Islamic scripture, what we find is not the mark of a being who created 13.8 billion years of cosmic history. We find the fears, values, and limited understanding of seventh century human beings projected onto a divine figure.

The signs of the last hour described in Hadiths contain no mention of space exploration, other galaxies, or the vast universe we now know exists. There is no awareness of a cosmos that dwarfs everything these scriptures describe. The entire framework is geocentric, tribal, and strikingly human in its concerns.

This leads to a question that is uncomfortable but worth asking seriously. What if Allah is not the creator of man, but rather a creation of man? A god not born among the stars, but imagined in the deserts of the seventh century. Shaped not by divine essence, but by the hopes, fears, and ignorance of early human beings who were doing their best to make sense of a world they could not yet understand.

What Was the Purpose Behind Creating Dinosaurs and Pre-Human Species?

If Allah created everything with supreme purpose and wisdom, then we have to ask a massive question. What was the purpose of the millions of species that lived, fought, and went completely extinct long before humans ever arrived? Scientists estimate that 99% of all species that ever existed are now extinct.

Consider the dinosaurs. These massive creatures ruled the Earth for over 150 million years. They lived, evolved, and dominated every continent, only to go extinct around 65 million years ago. What role did they play in Allah’s grand plan? Were they just a meaningless prelude? Were they a trial version of creation that was quietly thrown away?

Islam says absolutely nothing about them. The Quran does not contain even a hint of their existence. The reason for this silence is straightforward. Muhammad and his followers simply had no idea dinosaurs ever existed. That is not a divine mystery. That is a human knowledge gap.

The exact same problem appears when we look at pre-human species like Neanderthals and Denisovans. These were not just primitive animals. They made advanced tools, buried their dead, cared for their sick, and showed clear signs of intelligence. They lived and died long before the story of Adam and Eve is supposed to begin. Were they part of the divine test? If they were, why are they completely missing from Islamic teaching? If they were not, why did God create them to live and suffer for hundreds of thousands of years?

These are not minor details. They represent hundreds of millions of years of life on Earth that an all-knowing God apparently forgot to mention. The history written in the rocks tells a far deeper and more complex story than Islamic scripture ever acknowledges.

This silence is not a test of faith. It is the natural silence of a seventh-century man who knew about camels and deserts, but knew nothing about dinosaurs, ancient hominids, or the deep history of our planet. When a scripture cannot account for the vast majority of life that has ever existed on Earth, it is a fundamental failure.

Apologists' Excuse 6: "This is Just an Argument from Silence"

Modern defenders of Islam try to dismiss this problem. They claim that asking about dinosaurs is a weak argument because it relies on what the Quran does not say. They call it an "argument from silence" and tell critics to drop it.

However, this is a completely genuine objection that naturally arises in the mind of anyone who reflects on creation.

Think about it this way. Allah supposedly showed spectacular miracles to people in the past, but He does not show any miracles to us today. If Allah wanted to provide a timeless miracle for modern humans, He could have easily described dinosaurs, pre-human species, or the true age of the Earth in the Quran. When modern science eventually discovered these fossils, it would have served as undeniable proof that the Quran came from an all-knowing God.

Instead of giving us verifiable scientific facts as a miracle, Islamic texts give us stories that science actually disproves. For example, Sahih al-Bukhari (3326) and Sahih Muslim (2841) both contain authentic narrations stating that the first human, Adam, was 60 cubits tall (about 90 feet, or the length of a dinosaur).

Yet, when scientists dig up ancient human skeletons dating back 300,000 years, they find normal human sizes. No one was the size of a dinosaur.

Therefore, pointing out the missing dinosaurs is not just an argument from silence. It is a justified demand. An all-knowing God could have given us a provable historical fact to help us believe. Instead, the texts give us a provable myth that actually shows the author did not understand the history of the Earth.

The Illusion of "Supreme Wisdom"

This is where we must return to the standards we set at the very beginning of this article. Remember, a message from an all-wise, perfect God must display flawless supreme wisdom and perfect logic. It should stand the test of time and hold up under scientific scrutiny.

When apologists look at stories like a 90-foot-tall Adam, or when they try to justify why Allah completely ignored 150 million years of dinosaur history, they are forced to use endless circular excuses. They say, "Allah knows best," or "It wasn't necessary for salvation to mention dinosaurs."

But ask your own common sense: couldn't the followers of any false prophet or fraud use those exact same excuses to defend their leader's mistakes?

If a fictional book written by a human in the seventh century contained errors about history and science, its followers would have to do the exact same patchwork defense. They would have to make up excuses for what the book left out, and they would have to tell people to ignore the scientific errors it put in.

When a religion requires you to constantly make excuses for its text instead of allowing you to marvel at its perfect accuracy, it loses any claim to divine authorship. The absolute lack of supreme wisdom in these stories proves a simple reality. These are not the mysteries of a Just God, but they are the unprovable tales of a human author whose knowledge was limited to his own time and place.

What Is the Purpose of Eternal Life in Paradise?

Religious teachings constantly warn us against materialism. We are told not to get too attached to this world. We are told not to chase physical pleasures, luxury, or comfort, and instead focus entirely on our spiritual future. We are reminded that this life is temporary, and the real life only begins after we die.

But if we pause for a moment and look at what that eternal life actually looks like, we run into a massive contradiction.

In Islamic texts, Paradise is described as a place of endless eating, drinking, golden palaces, rivers of wine, and permanent sexual companionship. These are the exact same material pleasures that we are told to avoid or restrict while on Earth. Yet, in the next life, these exact things suddenly become the ultimate divine reward.

This makes no logical sense. Why are physical pleasures considered shallow, worldly distractions when enjoyed on Earth, but sacred and deeply spiritual when enjoyed forever in Heaven? If the whole purpose of this life is to rise above animal desires and materialism, why is the reward for doing so an eternity of absolute materialism?

When you look at the big picture, this reveals a major flaw in the design of the religion. It relies entirely on circular reasoning.

If you ask an apologist why this difficult life exists, they will say it exists to earn the next life. But if you ask them what the ultimate purpose of the next life is, the honest answer is just an eternity of luxury. Neither half of that equation actually explains what the point of anything is. This life exists to earn Heaven, and Heaven exists to reward you for enduring this life.

If a supreme God created the entire cosmos with perfect wisdom, the final destination should have a meaningful purpose. Instead, the Islamic version of Heaven looks exactly like a list of things a seventh-century human king or desert traveler would fantasize about. It does not show divine perfection. It shows a human-made reward system designed to motivate people to obey.

The Next Logical Step: Why the Test?

A discussion on the "Why of Creation" is incomplete without addressing the inevitable follow-up question: Why the Test?

Islamic scholars attempt to shift the debate toward the necessity of the "Test" once the initial arguments for creation begin to fail under logical scrutiny. They argue that existence is merely a trial designed to separate the righteous from the wicked. However, this second layer of reasoning introduces even deeper ethical and logical contradictions than the first.

If the act of creation itself is a paradox for a self-sufficient being, then the imposition of a high-stakes test, with the threat of eternal punishment, transforms that paradox into a profound moral crisis.

To understand why this divine examination is not an act of justice, but rather a fundamental violation of human rights and logic, continue to our next article:

• • Allah's Test is the Greatest Injustice Against Mankind