would the real son of god please stand up.

aboo mohammad

one of the primary doctrines of modern day christianity is the belief that jesus was the son
of god and for some he was also god himself. although in the bible there is nowhere that
jesus says i am god worship me. he always referred to himself as the son of man. even the
verses in the bible that christians use to claim that jesus was the son of god do not
literally mean the son of god. in hebrew the term son of god means close to god. in the
old testament we see

ge 5:22 and enoch walked with god after he begat methuselah three hundred years, and
begat sons and daughters:

ge 5:24 and enoch walked with god: and he was not; for god took him.

ge 6:9 these are the generations of noah: noah was a just man and perfect in his
generations, and noah walked with god. {perfect: or, upright}

so taken literally can we say that enoch and noah actually held god's hand and walked
together with him hand in hand? this too means that they were close to god. jesus himself
in the bible had referred to others as sons of god: adam, the peacemakers etc. basically
everyone who is upright following the way of god and fulfilling his will can be said to be
a son of god. so how did this concept of jesus being the son of god among others become
one of the primary concepts of christianity? many christians do not know that at the time
of jesus there were many other sons of god, some in neighbouring lands and others even
in judea, there were many others who like jesus had followers and so on, they too were
performing miracles and some had more followers even than jesus. below we shall see
the numerable sons of god that existed at the time of jesus and how these concepts were
brought in and blended into christianity as if they were its original concepts.
at the time when jesus was on this earth, there was a man from a town in asia minor
(present day turkey) called tyana, this man was called apollonius. apollonius of tyana was
actually a rival to jesus; he was said to be born approximately the same time as jesus and
he too had a miraculous birth announced to his mother, he was also said to have been
lifted into heaven. his followers considered him to be god and the son of god. while jesus
had just a few followers while he was around apollonius of tyana had many more
followers we can see in the bible that jesus brought back to life the daughter of a certain
ruler as seen here in:
matthew 9:
18 while he spake these things unto them, behold, there came a certain ruler, and
worshipped him, saying, my daughter is even now dead: but come and lay thy hand upon
her, and she shall live.
19 and jesus arose, and followed him, and so did his disciples.
20 and, behold, a woman, which was diseased with an issue of blood twelve years, came
behind him, and touched the hem of his garment:
21 for she said within herself, if i may but touch his garment, i shall be whole.
22 but jesus turned him about, and when he saw her, he said, daughter, be of good
comfort; thy faith hath made thee whole. and the woman was made whole from that hour.
23 and when jesus came into the ruler’s house, and saw the minstrels and the people
making a noise,
24 he said unto them, give place: for the maid is not dead, but sleepeth. and they laughed
him to scorn.
25 but when the people were put forth, he went in, and took her by the hand, and the maid
arose.

this same incidence took place with apollonius of tyana, he too brought back from the
dead, the daughter of a roman senator. now i don't deny that jesus performed miracles by
the will of god alone. but, if as christians claim, that he performing miracles is proof of
his divinity, then what can we say about apollonius of tyana. apolonnius healed the sick
too just like jesus. apolonnius performed other miracles too. he too was raising people
from the dead, healing the sick and also drove the devil out of people and there was an
incident where a herd of swine rushed down into the lake as evil spirits rushed out of the
young man, isn't this deja vu. there is also the incident related in th e gopsel of mark:9:38
john said to jesus "teacher,.....we saw a man driving out demons in your name and we
told him to stop, because he was not one of us." who could that man have been? most
probably, one of the other sons of god that were around at the same time.
doctor r.w bernard says in part 2 of his book apollonius the nazarene:" from a tender age,
resolved to abstain from meat, from wine and from association with women, who let his
hair grow long and did not permit a blade to touch his chin”.

paul (saul of tarsus), also known as the true founder of modern day christianity, was
actually from tarsus another town in asia minor (today's turkey) at the same time of jesus.
tyana was actually not far from tarsus and the teachings of apollonius very easily reached
saul. it was also mentioned by his biographer that at the age of 12 apolonius came to
tarsus to study philosophy. hence paul would then know about him. although apolonius of
tyana outlived jesus of nazareth to almost a century, his teachings did not survive
however. his pagan doctrines, together with others, were incorporated into paul's
christianity that became the acceptable creed and the rest was destroyed and his followers
were put to death by emperor constantine who used to be a pagan. constantine too
(having been a pagan who had accepted christianity) knew the teachings of apollonius. in
order for one to survive the other had to go since we could not have 2 gods and sons of
god being worshipped at the same time. so with the help of constantine the teachings and
followers of apollonius were destroyed and that of paul’s christianity was preached. by
that time many temples and shrines of apollonius had been erected only to be destroyed
again by those who created the christian faith

scene two exit apollonius enter the son of the father. as i point out in my book "crucify
him crucify whom?" that at the time of jesus there was another jesus son of the father. he
explains in the same book that: "jesus son of the father and jesus son of the father end up
in the same prison on the same night". is it a coincidence? he asks. even a lot of christians
do not know that apart from jesus son of mary there was also jesus barabbas. bar means
son and abba means father in hebrew and aramaic. and his first name was jesus, the bibles
have removed the name jesus when they refer to barabbas but some modern bibles have
kept the name it. aboo mohammad explains in his book that “the church father origen was
appalled by the use of "jesus barabbas" in the manuscripts he was familiar with because
he held the conviction that no "sinner" should bare the name and title of "jesus the christ
". jesus barabbas was a criminal, a murderer and a revolutionary, a man imprisoned for
sedition and insurrection. some modern day bibles still hold the name jesus barabbas:
barabbas in mentioned in the gospels as a criminal in the gospel of matthew and others.

matthew27:16
this year there was a notorious criminal in prison, a man named barabbas. [some
manuscripts read jesus barabbas; also in 27:17.](new living translation)

footnotes of the new king james version says:

{matthew 27:16 nu-text reads jesus barabbas.}

so as we can see that at the same time there was in jerusalem another son of the father (in
other words son of god)who was detained at the same time as jesus son of mary, he too
was called jesus and he was called the son of the father (in christian terms the son of
god). as aboo mohammad points out in his book quoting mainly from the bible that “in
english it is jesus barabbas, in hebrew it was yeshua barabba. greek: iesous ton barabbas.”
and goes on to explain from his book that when pilate asked the mass of the people, who
he should free (after he had taken the decision to free one of them) the gospel of matthew
says:

mat 27:
17 therefore when they were gathered together, pilate said unto them, whom will ye that i
release unto you? barabbas, or jesus which is called christ?

but in its proper wording it would go something like this “do you want me to release
jesus son of the father or jesus son of the father.” this is proof that once again there at the
time of jesus there was another jesus son of the father and as we know pilate did not
speak in english so the name her would be asking to release would not be jesus but
yeshua and as both of them were known as sons of god he would call both barabba. so as
we can see again that there was another son of the father at the same time and jesus and
as i point out in my book, it could have well been jesus barabbas who was up on that
cross.
the next contender for the role of son of god was mithras. he had all the features given to
jesus in bible. the bible borrowed or at best stole wholesale from the mithras concept,
added in to christianity as if it was originally from christianity and then did away with
mithraism. mithras was born of a virgin on 25 dec. he too shared a final meal before
being called to heaven; he was then resurrected and returned to earth as the son of god,
bread and wine is offered as a sacrificial meal which was to represent the blood and flesh
mithras, he was even considered to be god. mithras had 12 symbolic disciples, the zodiac
his religion had more followers at a certain time than what christianity had, however from
the seed that paul of tarsus planted, concepts of other religions were added to pauline
christianity and the other religion, belief, concept was discarded, this is why christianity
became more popular since the two main converts paul and constantine, one an ex jew
the other an ex pagan, incorporated other doctrines big time into the religion to make it
more acceptable to new adherents of christianity. so as we see above that mithras was the
closest contender too for the candidature of the son of god but was pipped at the post by
jesus with help of paul and constantine. what you see bolded was borrowed or taken
wholesale and added into christianity. at the time of its advent and for a while it was very
popular with the roman soldiers and roman officials. however mithraism was a religion
for males only and that was what could have made it less popular compared to
christianity.
another contender for the post of son of god and god was tiberius emperor of rome; he
was the ruler over jerusalem too and thus known as the son of god in that area too. he too
was worshipped and called the son of god.
so as one can see that this concept of the son of god was not an original concept of
christianity, it was imported form many other beliefs and at the time sons of god were a
dime a dozen.
in order not to be wronged by following unauthentic, imported doctrines the best way is
to stick to the original belief
9:35. it befits not (the majesty of) allâh that he should beget a son glorified (and exalted
be he above all that they associate with him). when he decrees a thing, he only says to it,
"be!" and it is.

23:91. no son (or offspring or children) did allâh beget, nor is there any ilâh (god) along
with him; (if there had been many gods), behold, each god would have taken away what
he had created, and some would have tried to overcome others! glorified be allâh above
all that they attribute to him!

god has no son, had no need for one and as we can see that the doctrine was taken for
other religions and attributed to prophet jesus. it is not an original concept, the evidence
is there so why deny it.
so be wise, stick to the truth, peace
aboo mohammad