Allah's Test is the Greatest Injustice Against Mankind

The core question of "Why Test?" bears similarities to the broader inquiry of "Why Creation?" This topic has proven challenging for Islamic scholars and apologists to explain, as it calls into question the underlying motivation behind Allah's choice to TEST His creation.

When this question is posed, Islamic apologists often respond with a familiar refrain:

"Mankind was created to pass the TEST."

However, this response doesn't address the core question: Why did Allah decide to TEST mankind, a decision that necessitated their CREATION in the first place?

Furthermore, the notion of a "test" primarily relates to tasks that humanity must undertake AFTER they have already been created. Consequently, the concept of a test doesn't inherently provide a reason or justification for the initial act of CREATION itself.

Ultimately, Islamists have to openly accept that:

• Allah neither told the underlying reason/motivation for the Creation
• Nor did Allah tell told the underlying reason/motivation for the TEST
• Nor did Allah tell the reasons for not answering the above mentioned two questions. 

Allah's Test: The Greatest INJUSTICE against Mankind

Either there exists no Allah in the heavens. But if true, then Allah's Test is the greatest injustice against mankind. 

Consider the following facts:

• 99.9999% of children born into Christian families adopt Christianity.

• 99.9999% of children born into Hindu families remain Hindu.

• 99.9999% of children born into Jewish families remain Jewish.

• The conversion rate to Islam among non-Muslims is less than 0.0001%.

These are not coincidences, but they are the logical outcome of how human psychology and socialization work. Children are indoctrinated into the religion of their parents from birth, forming emotional and cognitive bonds that are extraordinarily difficult to break. This is true for Muslims as well, where a child born in Saudi Arabia is as likely to remain Muslim as a child born in India is to remain Hindu.

This means, those 6 billion people today, who are born in non-Muslim families by Allah's design, they have 99.9999% less chance of becoming Muslim as compared to those who are born in Muslims families by Allah's Design. 

The implications of this reality for Islamic theology are staggering. 

If Allah is the designer of this system, and the system ensures that 99.9999% of people remain in the religion of their birth, then Allah has effectively created a mechanism that condemns the overwhelming majority of humanity to eternal hellfire, regardless of their inherent goodness, moral character, or humanitarian contributions.

This is not justice, but this is a rigged game.

Our sense of humanity clearly tells us that this is the Greatest DHULM (injustice) ever against mankind. There is no greater injustice in the universe than billions of innocent people being condemned to eternal hellfire simply because they were born into non-Muslim families by Allah's design.

Alone this injustice is ENOUGH to leave the religion, as it goes against humanity.

Why would Muhammad's Mother face the Eternal Fire of Hell? How this can be considered Justice?

According to Islamic belief, Muhammad's mother, Aminah bint Wahb, died as a polytheist; because of this, Muhammad was forbidden from even praying for her forgiveness:

Sahih Muslim, 976: The Prophet of Allah said: I asked my Lord for permission to pray for my mother's forgiveness, but He did not grant me permission; then I asked Him for permission to visit her grave, and He permitted me.

Muslim scholars defend the Islamic belief regarding Aminah (Muhammad's mother) being sent to Hell by claiming that the "Deen-e-Hanif" (the religion of Abraham) existed during that era; therefore, Aminah had a full opportunity to accept Islam, but she did not. Consequently, Allah sending her to Hell is considered Allah's justice, not injustice; let us examine this claim in the light of history and Islamic traditions:

Was Hanif Religion (also known as Religion of Abrahim) Well-Known in Arabia?

Islamic traditions themselves acknowledge that there were only 4 followers of Hanif Religion in Mecca at that time. And even among them, 3 later apostatized and converted to Christianity, leaving only one person, Zayd bin Amr bin Nufayl, as the sole remaining follower of Hanif Religion.

However, the issue with this Zayd bin Amr is that he himself had absolutely no knowledge of anything called Hanif Religion initially. According to a narration in Sahih Bukhari, Zayd bin Amr found out about the Abrahamic religion for the first time only when he met a Christian scholar who mentioned Abraham to him for the very first time.

Sahih Bukhari, 3827: 
When Zayd asked the Syrian scholar about the true religion, the scholar replied that he should become a Hanif; upon Zayd's inquiry about what a Hanif was, the scholar said it was the religion of Abraham, who was neither a Jew nor a Christian, and who worshipped none but Allah. When Zayd heard these statements about Abraham, he immediately raised his hands and said: "O my Allah! I bear witness that I follow the religion of Abraham."

Therefore, it is proven from this account that nothing called Hanif Religion or the Abrahamic religion was "well-known" within Arabian society, rather, Zayd bin Amr learned about the Prophet Abraham for the first time only after being informed by a Christian scholar. Consequently, what chance did Aminah (i.e. mother of the prophet) realistically have to understand Religion of Hanif well enough to accept it?

Furthermore, there is no evidence whatsoever that Aminah ever even met Zayd. Similarly, what about the hundreds of thousands of other Arabian women who lived during Aminah's era but never crossed paths with Zayd, how were they supposed to accept Islam?

Social Constraints of Women:  Please also remember that Muhammad's mother lived in a society completely dominated by tribe and family; would it be possible for an ordinary woman to be influenced by the ideas of a single, reclusive man like Zayd and stand against her entire tribe and belief system?

The Example of Umar ibn al-Khattab

Umar was a powerful and influential figure among the Quraysh. He was intimately familiar with Muhammad and his message from the very beginning. Muhammad preached to him directly, yet it took Umar seven years to accept Islam. During those seven years, Umar actively opposed Islam and persecuted its followers.

If a person of Umar's stature, intelligence, and proximity to the Prophet took seven years to convert, how can it be reasonably expected that an ordinary person (like Aminah, who was a simple woman of that era) , would accept Islam after merely "hearing" the name of Hanif Religion?

Does this trial of Aminah look like divine fairness and justice to you from any perspective? 

It is not just Aminah, but Muhammad's grandfather, Abdul Muttalib, faces the same issue because according to Islam, he did not accept the religion of Abraham, which makes him fuel for the eternal fire of Hell as well (Sahih Bukhari, 3884). 

This is despite the fact that Abdul Muttalib was a person who provided water to the pilgrims and served them according to Islamic traditions. And when Abrahah attacked, Allah sent the flocks of birds precisely because of Abdul Muttalib's prayer.

In reality, the underlying motivation for this doctrine (i.e. all non-Muslims are fuel of eternal hellfire) was completely POLITICAL. The eternal fate of non-Muslim souls was not a fixed cosmic truth, but a flexible tool in hands of Muhammad, which he adjusted to meet the strategic needs of the political situation.

In the early days in Medina, Muhammad attempted to gain favor with the Jews by asserting that all Jews and Christians who do good deeds would go to paradise. Consequently, the message during this early phase in Median was remarkably inclusive, assuring non-Muslims that their righteousness was recognized by God independent of his prophethood.

This diplomatic necessity is encapsulated in Quran 2:62:

Quran 2:62: Rest assured that whosoever from among the Muslims or the Jews or the Christians or the Sabaeans believes in Allah and the Last Day, and performs good deeds, he will have his reward with his Lord and he will have no cause for fear and grief].

This inclusivity shattered when armed conflict with Mecca became inevitable. The Muslim migrants (Muhajirun) faced a profound psychological crisis: they were ordered to fight and kill their own blood relatives and tribesmen. In the tribal framework of Arabia, killing your kin was the ultimate taboo. To shatter this ingrained loyalty, Muhammad fundamentally altered the theological status of the Meccans. Good deeds were suddenly rendered useless without submission to his authority. By declaring that anyone rejecting his message was "fuel for hellfire," he systematically dehumanized the enemy, replacing familial affection with the animosity required to wage total war.

This psychological engineering reached its peak when Muhammad turned this doctrine upon his own bloodline. By explicitly telling his companions that his own mother (Aminah), uncle (Abu Talib), and grandfather (Abdul Muttalib) were burning in Hell, he set an unyielding standard.

The political message to his followers was unmistakable: If the Prophet’s own beloved parents and protectors are worthless enemies of God due to their disbelief, you have absolutely no excuse to harbor mercy or hesitation toward your own non-Muslim families.

This culminating policy was finalized later in Surah At-Tawbah (9:113), which forbade believers from even praying for the forgiveness of their deceased polytheist relatives:

ْQuran 9:113: "It is not fitting for the Prophet and those who believe to pray for the forgiveness of polytheists, even if they are close relatives, after it has become clear to them that they are the companions of the Hellfire."

The Claim of Muslim Scholars: The Trial is Just Because Everyone Has Heard of Islam

Religious preachers claim that Allah does not do injustice to anyone, because in the modern era, the message of Islam has reached the entire world and every non-Muslim has an "equal opportunity" to accept it. But we reject this claim. Merely hearing the name of Islam is by no means sufficient because:

1. If it took Umar ibn Khattab 7 years, how does simply hearing the name of Islam become sufficient?

2. The companions in Mecca are considered of grand stature according to Islamic belief; yet, a vast majority of them did not accept Islam for over 20 years until the Conquest of Mecca. Therefore, how is merely hearing the name of Islam considered enough?

3. The examples of Muhammad's mother and grandfather are right here, as they were unable to accept the Hanif Religion.

4. If 99.9999% of non-Muslims stick to the religion of their families, it is not a mere coincidence; it is the logical outcome of human psychology and social pressure. Simply "hearing" about a religion is not enough to make someone accept it.

A severe double standard of Muslim preachers becomes evident here, i.e.,  when a Muslim wants to leave Islam, it is demanded that they must first get a "PhD" in Islam, understand every single nuance, and only then decide to leave. However, when a non-Muslim is invited to Islam, no research or knowledge is deemed necessary, but their mere "hearing" of the name of Islam becomes the justification for their eternal punishment. Is this not a blatant contradiction?

What about children with disabilities who live a life of extreme pain and suffering?

This issue takes on an ethically and rationally grave form when we reflect on children born with severe mental and physical disabilities or terminal illnesses—conditions where the only inevitable outcome is pain and death.

Without their consent, these children are thrust into an existence where every act, from breathing to movement, becomes an ordeal of agony. They spend their entire short lives in this anguish and pass away in early childhood. Here, reason questions: What was the crime of these innocents? And what moral lesson was the universe deriving from this meaningless suffering?

Religious circles typically attempt to mask this horrific reality by arguing that such a child is a "trial" for the parents, and as a reward, the child will go to Paradise and also become a means of salvation for the parents (through intercession). This explanation, though seemingly comforting, actually contradicts fundamental principles of Islamic theology:

1. Lack of Intention (Niyyah):
A core principle of Islam is that "actions are judged by intentions" (Innamal a'malu binniyat). The entire concept of reward and punishment is tied to a human's free will and conscious choice. A disabled child, who is mentally incapable of making such decisions, neither chose to be born nor consented to this agony or any "trial." When their own intention is not involved in the process, awarding them Paradise as a "reward" is as morally nonsensical as punishing someone without cause.

2. Why Paradise for Parents?
If parents become entitled to Paradise simply because a disabled child was born to them, the question of "intention" arises here as well. The parents did not "intend" to have a disabled child; rather, this situation was forcibly imposed upon them. Does granting an eternal reward for a forced and involuntary circumstance fulfill the requirements of justice?

3. Humans as a "Tool":
If it is accepted that a child was given pain solely to test others (the parents), it raises a massive question mark over divine justice. It implies that the child was not an independent human being but merely a "tool" or a "disposable object" sacrificed for someone else's spiritual growth. Does a Merciful and Just God consider it acceptable to use an innocent soul as fuel for someone else's test?

4. A "Post-hoc" Excuse:
The reality is that promising the "green gardens of Paradise" for disabled children is a post-hoc excuse—an explanation fabricated after the fact to justify a situation. Because the religious mind cannot provide a rational reason for the fundamental injustice and suffering present in this world, it resorts to a hypothetical future Paradise to label present-day cruelty as "justice."

The Apologetic Excuse: We cannot COMPREHEND the WISDOM of Allah 

Even Islamic apologists cannot deny that the case of disabled children seems to be a grave injustice according to all standards of human reason. Their final defense is to claim that Allah did not reveal the reason for such suffering because human intellect is incapable of comprehending divine wisdom.

However, this excuse holds no weight when examined logically.

The Double Standard of Human Reason

Consider the following:

• When it comes to recognizing Allah: Humans are repeatedly commanded to use their intellect to observe the universe, reflect on its design, and deduce the existence of a Creator. The Quran explicitly appeals to human reason:

  "Indeed, in the creation of the heavens and the earth and the alternation of the day and night are signs for people of reason." (Quran 3:190)

• When it comes to questioning divine justice: The same intellect, which was deemed sufficient to recognize Allah, is now declared inadequate to understand His wisdom. When reason identifies profound injustice, such as children born into agony, the response is: "Do not question; you cannot comprehend."

This is a fundamental contradiction. If human reason is too limited to understand divine wisdom, then it is also too limited to recognize divine existence in the first place. The very faculty used to affirm Allah is the same faculty dismissed when it raises objections.

Why This Double Standard Is Logically Indefensible:

To put it bluntly:

• If reason is adequate to affirm Allah, it must be adequate to question Him.

• If reason is inadequate to question Him, it is inadequate to affirm Him.

You cannot have it both ways. This is a fundamental inconsistency that Islamic theology has never adequately resolved.

A False Prophet would have also shielded himself by using the same excuse:

Perhaps the most telling critique is that the "incomprehensible wisdom" defense is structurally identical to what any false prophet or fabricated religion would say.

Consider:

• A false prophet claims to speak for God.

• When confronted with difficult questions, the false prophet cannot provide satisfactory answers.

• To protect his claim, he asserts: "God's wisdom is beyond human understanding. You cannot question it."

This is the perfect shield for any fraudulent claim. It is untestable, unfalsifiable, and immune to criticism. If Islam were a human invention, its prophets would have predicted exactly this defense to protect their system from intellectual scrutiny.

What the Suffering of Disabled Children Truly Proves:

The existence of children born into extreme pain and suffering, without any capacity for consent or moral choice, is not evidence of divine wisdom or justice. It is evidence that the universe does not operate according to principles of fairness.

These disabled children are living proof that the system of the universe is not the result of "Intelligent Design" or a "Just God," but rather the outcome of blind biological accidents and evolutionary processes. This universe does not operate on principles of justice. Justice does not descend from the heavens; it must be crafted by human beings themselves through their own reason and empathy.

Why a Test of PRAISING Allah? 

One could have understood if a Test consisted of helping Humanity and doing good deeds and avoiding evils.

But why a Test of worshipping and praising Allah 5 times a day?

And this "Worship and Praise Syndrome" extends beyond humans:

• Consider angels. They've been engaged in worshipping and praising Allah for nearly eternity, despite gaining no benefit from it, nor are they destined for paradise. Why does Allah demand their constant worship and praise? Yes, Islamists come up with the same lame excuse that Allah does not need worship and praise from angels, but it is the same as if Allah says: "I am eating food, although I don't need food", or if Allah says: "I am sleeping, although I don't need sleep."

• But it doesn't stop with angels. According to Islam, all creatures, from animals and insects to celestial bodies like the moon, sun, and stars, as well as mountains and each and every particle in the universe is worshipping and praising Allah incessantly. Yet, this devotion will not benefit them, as none of these entities will enter paradise and have 72 houris.

Doesn't Allah's insistence on being worshipped and praised 24 hours suggest narcissism, indicating a self-centered motive for creating humankind and the universe to praise him?

Man has created Allah, which is why all human weaknesses are also found in Allah.

What does Allah gain from the constant praises of angels, animals, birds, and even every particle in the universe? Islamic apologists might say that Allah does not need all this praise ... But then it's again like Allah constantly eating food and also at the same time saying that does not need to eat. 

Muhammad's Claim: The TEST is justified while all humans testified Allah is their lord BEFORE their Birth

Many people were not happy with Muhammad, when he claimed that their parents were fuel of eternal hellfire, while they died without recognising Allah as their lord. But people were unable to understand how their parents could have recognised Allah (or the religion of HANIF) when there were hardly any opportunities available hear the message of Hanif. 

Anyhow, Muhammad made the following CLAIM to justify the TEST.

Quran 7:172:

And when your Lord took from the children of Adam - from their loins - their descendants and made them testify of themselves, [saying to them], "Am I not your Lord?" They said, "Yes, we have testified." [This] - lest you should say on the day of Resurrection, "Indeed, we were of this unaware." 

Firstly, it is not an argument, but only a claim by Muhammad. No one is able to verify it if any Allah exists, and who took them out from their loins (before their birth) and let them testify that Allah is their lord. 

Secondly, this verse claims that:

• Allah took the promise (to accept him as Lord and to worship him alone) from all humans BEFOFRE their birth. 
• Then they were made to FORGET this promise when they were sent into this world. 
• And then they will be reminded of this promise again, only AFTER their death (on the day of Ressurection). 

Therefore, the question is, whatever happened before the birth, or whatever will happen after the death, why Allah is taking a TEST on its basis in this world?

It would only become a test if Allah had appeared in this life to all humans, and then He would have put humans to a test, whereby intentional disobedience would result in eternal fire.

For example, according to the Islamic story, Allah appeared to Iblees (i.e., Lucifer/Satan), and Iblees was not caused to FORGET Allah, but still he intentionally disobeyed Him. In such a case, one can understand why Iblees will be put in hell.

But the case of humans is totally different from that of Iblees, and it has absolutely no justification:

• There are thousands of people who are born into non-Muslim families. Allah never appeared to them openly as He did to Iblees. Thus, under the influence of their families, 99.9999% of these people never accepted Allah and remained non-Muslims.
• Millions of non-Muslims truthfully try to find out the real God, but Islam has so many problematic, controversial, and anti-humanity teachings that they had to reject Islam due to their true intentions.

Not to mention, there are millions of ex-Muslims who were firmly believing and practicing Muslims. But they also felt the pain of humanity. When they tried to find God with sincere hearts, their search led them to the conclusion that there is no Allah in the heavens, and Muhammad was making revelations on his own. Thus, they left Islam and Allah.

Islam claims:

إنما الأعمال بالنيات

(Verily, the reward of deeds depends on the intentions)

But here we see a clear contradiction. Instead of being judged based on their true intentions, they are called an apostate. Islam demands that they be killed in this life, and then Allah condemns them to eternal hellfire, disregarding all the good deeds they did for mankind. 

An Islamist's objection:

An Islamic preacher wrote: 

If someone says that they do not know or do not remember acknowledging Allah as their Lord as mentioned in Surah Al-A'raf, Ayah 172, this argument is not acceptable. Allah has taken all of us out of our mothers' wombs, and we do not remember what we did or saw in the womb. An atheist does not have an answer for this either.

Our Response: 

We do not remember being in the mother's womb today, but our mother remembers, and others have seen us in the womb. There are countless witnesses.

However, in the story where Allah took a covenant from all humans after extracting them from Adam's loins, is there even a single witness to this? Allah is unseen, the angels are unseen, and the revelation is unseen. Consequently, anyone could make such claims about their religious stories where all witnesses are 'unseen'.

Muhammad's Claim: The Test is justified while mankind itself chose it for themselves

Muhammad also tried to justify the TEST by bringing the following claim:

Quran 33:72:

إِنَّا عَرَضْنَا ٱلْأَمَانَةَ عَلَى ٱلسَّمَٰوَٰتِ وَٱلْأَرْضِ وَٱلْجِبَالِ فَأَبَيْنَ أَن يَحْمِلْنَهَا وَأَشْفَقْنَ مِنْهَا وَحَمَلَهَا ٱلْإِنسَٰنُ ۖ إِنَّهُۥ كَانَ ظَلُومًا جَهُولًا

We offered the trust to the heavens and the earth and the mountains, but they refused to carry it and were afraid of doing so; but man carried it. Surely he is a tyrant and ignorant. 

In Muhammad's attempt to justify why humans were subjected to the test, a significant issue arises. This argument actually places the blame on Allah Himself rather than on humans. The questions that emerge include:

1. Why did humans agree to bear this trust?
2. According to this verse, it is Allah who created humans as tyrants and ignorant beings, and it was the sole reason that they accepted the test.
3. Therefore, if it was Allah who created humans as tyrants and ignorant beings, then the true culprit is Allah Himself. Humans cannot be held responsible for this, and they should not be unjustly punished.
4. Moreover, although Allah (i.e. Muhammad) claimed in this verse that the heavens/earth/mountains were also presented with the test, but this statement makes no sense as heavens/earth/mountains have absolutely no FREE Will and they can neither succeed nor fail nor refuse nor become afraid of doing it as they would never fall in the hell or paradise. 

This highlights the complete failure of Muhammad to present a single logical argument for putting humans to the test, especially considering that the majority of them will end up in hell by Allah's Design and suffer eternal torment. How does making humans ظَلُومًا جَهُولًا tyrant and ignorant save Allah from injustice of putting majority of humankind in eternal hellfire according to his Design?

And the jinns are not even the “Best of Creations اشرفُ المخلوقات”, and their majority too will still land in the hellfire for eternity. 

Quran 7.179:

وَلَقَدْ ذَرَأْنَا لِجَهَنَّمَ كَثِيرًا مِّنَ ٱلْجِنِّ وَٱلْإِنسِ

And indeed We have created majority of jinns and men for hell

Poor jinns. But the good thing is that they don't exist except in the minds of religiously brainwashed people.