Son of God, Son of Man, there IS A difference?

Son of God, Son of Man, is there a difference? Yes, but not what some may think. The vernacular of the time is completely different from what it became thanks to Greco-Roman changes. Thankfully many have noticed the problem and set out to correct it.

Son of Man means born of the union between a man and a woman. There is nothing divine about this at all.  Numerous times in the Bible this term is used by God, His messengers, and others to describe a person used by God. An example is Ezekiel of which he is referred to as Son of Man throughout the book.
It is also used as a descriptive for Jesus but for some reason people think it has divine prominence here, it doesn't.

Son of God is used to describe a person of authority, or great importance such as royalty and nobles of sorts. It is also used to describe those who are human that are used by God. I say again, a human male of a male and female parentage used by God for a special purpose.

The Sons of God in Genesis were nobles who went around and slept with whoever and whatever they chose. Were there abominations that were created, absolutely. The were the Nephilim. Were there messengers (angels) that came to earth, yes but they did not and do not have free will so they could not have had intimate relations.     

Jesus was called both Son of Man and Son of God. This technically means that he was born of two parents, not just one, and he was on a mission for God. He acted as a prophet and a priest. He was not of Levi so he could not be a Priest which is why he was called Rabbi (teacher). When he said "I and the Father are one", he meant that he is of one accord with God. Meaning that he is Torah observant and was teaching Israel to return to God.