But in any case, even within a Trinitarian framework, the title "Son of God" refers to exactly one part out of three of the Trinity, and then has particular reference to His Incarnation as the King of Israel, a man. So again, the distinction remains.
"Son of God" was, to the 1st Century Jews, simply a title for the Messiah derived from 2 Sa. 7:14 and Psalm 2
Messiah in Hebrew is mashiyach, not literally Son of God. The Jews would tell you such a literal interpretation is heresy. Mashiyach, in Judaism, is no god. He is human, literal, earthly savior of (earthly) Israel, and the (earthly) king of Israel, anointend by God (in fact all Israel's kings were anointend by God).
For example, when Kefa (Peter) made his confession of faith in Mat. 16 and called Yeshua "the Messiah, the Son of God," he was not suddenly endowed with full knowledge of the Trinity
That's what was so different from the usual Hebraic interpretation, Buggman, and why Christ comments "for flesh and blood hath not revealed it [this truth] unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven." (Mat 16:17)
The Jews did not connect the word mashiyach with divinity but only with humanity. The Gospels, however, to the contrary, point to the full divinity of mashiyach.
That is made obvious in Angel Gabriel's words, who is a messenger of God in Luke 1:35, and in the words of St. Peter in Mat 16:16, who was moved by the Holy Spirit to recognize that which was not obvious.