Son Of Man.

Sources for the "Son of Man"
Most commentators start their journey on the SOM with Daniel 7. Sometimes they look into the ANE (Ancient Near East) to find comparable pagan divine figures. But somehow and some way, if we are to believe an entirely neutral source, they have missed the most relevant key of all.
It was as a result of my research on Zoroaster that I found the most important data, which comes from Ernest Herzfeld's Zoroaster and His World [835-840]. Herzfeld notes the uses of phrases containing "son of..." in the ancient world and what purpose they served. The phrase as used in Daniel is bar enash.
Note: This is an important distinction from other uses of the phrase in the OT, which generally use 'adam for man.
The combination bar enash and its parallels in Old Babylonian carry the meaning of an heir or successor to royalty, or of a free man of the highest class. A "man" here is not just any man, but as we might say, "THE MAN" as in royalty. Herzfeld notes an example of this usage in the Code of Hammurabi.
Daniel was written at a time when this phrase had a specific and known meaning. In the context of Daniel 7:13, in which the one "like a son of man" comes to the Ancient of Days (Almighty God) and is given dominion of the sort that God possesses, the significance of Jesus' "son of man" usage cannot be overstated. It is functionally equivalent to saying that the one like a son of man is rightful heir and successor to the divine throne. "Son of man" is essentially the same as "Son of God" in this context.
It is therefore clear that if Jesus is using the phrase consistent with its original meaning, it is a powerful and clear claim to deity. [Tekton.]