The Muslim takes strong exception to the Christian dogma that "Jesus is the only begotten son, begotten not made". This is what the Christian is made to repeat from childhood in his catechism. I have asked learned Christians, again and again as to what they are really trying to emphasize, when they say: "Begotten not made".
They know that according to their own God given (?) records, God has sons by the tons:
"...Adam, which was the son of God."(Luke 3:38)
"That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair... And when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them..." (Genesis 6: 2,4)
"...Israel is My son, even My firstborn:" (Exodus 4:22)
"...for I (God) am a Father to Israel, and Ephraim is My firstborn." (Jeremiah 31:9)
"...the Lord hath said unto me (David): 'Thou art My son: this day have I begotten thee." (Psalms 2:7)
"For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God." (Romans 18:14)
Can't you see that in the language of the Jew, every righteous person, every Tom, Dick and Harry who followed the Will and Plan of God, was a "Son of God". It was a metaphorical descriptive term commonly used among the Jews. The Christian agrees with this reasoning, but goes on to say: "but Jesus was not like that". Adam was made by God. Every living thing was made by God, He is the Lord, Cherisher and Sustainer of all. Metaphorically speaking therefore God is the Father of all. But Jesus was the "begotten" Son of God, not a created Son of God?

Begotten Means "Sired"!
In my forty years of practical experience in talking to learned Christians, not a single one has opened his mouth to hazard an explanation of the phrase "begotten not made". It had to be an American who dared to explain. He said: "It means, sired by God." "What!" I exploded: "Sired by God?" "No, no!" he said, "I am only trying to explain the meaning, I do not believe that God really sired a son."
The sensible Christian says that the words do not literally mean what they say. Then why do you say it? Why are you creating unnecessary conflict between the 1,200,000,000 Christians and a thousand million Muslims of the world in making senseless statements?
Reason for Objection

The Muslim takes exception to the word "begotten", because begetting is an animal act, belonging to the lower animal functions of sex. How can we attribute such a lowly capacity to God? Metaphorically we are all the children of God, the good and the bad, and Jesus would be closer to being the Son of God than any one of us, because he would be more faithful to God then any one of us can ever be. From that point of view he is preeminently the Son of God.
Although this pernicious word "begotten" has now unceremoniously been thrown out of the "Most Accurate" version of the Bible, the Revised Standard Version (R.S.V.), its ghost still lingers on in the Christian mind, both black and white. Through its insidious brainwashing the white man is made to feel superior to his black Christian brother of the same Church and Denomination. And in turn, the black man is given a permanent inferiority complex through this dogma.

Brain-washed Inferiority
The human mind can't help reasoning that since the "begotten son" of an African will look like an African, and that of a Chinaman as a Chinese, and that of an Indian like an Indian: so the begotten son of God aught naturally to look like God. Billions of beautiful pictures and replicas of this "only begotten son of God" are put in peoples hands. He looks like a European with blonde hair, blue eyes and handsome features like e one I saw in the "King of Kings" or "The Day of Triumph" or "Jesus of Nazareth". Remember Jeffrey Hunter? The "Savior" of the Christian is more like a German than a Jew with his polly nose. So naturally, if the son is a white man, the father would also be a white man (God?). Hence the darker skinned races of the earth subconsciously have the feeling of inferiorly ingrained in their souls as God's "step children". No amount of face creams, skin lighteners and hair strengtheners will erase the inferiority.
God is neither black nor white. He is beyond the imagination of the mind of man. Break the mental shackles of a Caucasian (white) man-god, and you have broken the shackles of a permanent inferiority. But intellectual bondages are harder to shatter: the slave himself fights to retain them.

Let's see....

First, the word "man" used in any of the cases you sited above, with exception of John 3:16, are the Strong's Concordance #120, it's the Hebrew word " adam" or # 376 "iysh" both are translated "man". On the word "son", each occurance prior to John 3:16,..is the Hebrew word #1121. #1121 = ben,..as in a family. In the case of Christ, the word "Son" is the Greek word #5207 which means a "son, kinship-son". As for the word "begotten" it's word #3439 (Greek dictionary) which means "only-born" and "sole, only (begotten,child).

And secondly, from my view, What would the Son of God look-like? Well,...I'd have to say he'd look like God. John 1:1, "In the beginning was the the Word (#3056 Logos Jesus himself), the Word was with God, and the Word was God. (So Jesus was God from the very beginning) in v14 it says, "And the Word (Jesus) became(#1096=begotten) flesh, and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, glory as of the only begotten(#3439) from the Father(#3962-father , parent), full of grace and truth.

I hope this helps someone.

Dr. Spiritual