Perhaps you have missed the several times over the years in here that I've had to bring up this point and correct this error? Most all of the individuals held to this view out of sheer ignorance (not stupidity). In 99% of the cases, it was in regard to John 1:1 and the identification of the "Word" (Logos), which they believed to be Jesus (of Nazareth). My way of dealing with the error is to simply have them apply this thought; that the "Word" is Jesus to verse 14 and substituting the name "Jesus" for "the Word". The result is most enlightening, for the text would then read:

"And the Word Jesus became flesh, and dwelt among us (and we beheld his glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father), full of grace and truth."

The next question asked is all too apparent, "What is the identity of the 'flesh' in this text if "the Word" was Jesus (of Nazareth)? The "flesh", according to John's Gospel and all of Scripture is Jesus of Nazareth. So, again substituting what is now acknowledged, that "flesh" is Jesus, the text would therefore read:

"And the Word Jesus became flesh Jesus, and dwelt among us (and we beheld his glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father), full of grace and truth."

Oh vey.....!!! In 99.99% of the cases, the proverbial lights go on and the person suddenly realizes that the "Son" is eternal and "Jesus" is temporal, yet consisting of both the eternal God and finite man in the one person, aka: the doctrine of the incarnation of the Son of God.

In His Grace,

[Linked Image]

simul iustus et peccator

[Linked Image]