You said:
Jesus is not a human. If you had said "God was supreme over the human Jesus," I would likely agree with you.
Now you are ok with LN that the Word became a human being?
BDAG lists J 1:14 under γινομαι double accusative.
W. double nom. (Ps.-Apollod., Epit. 3, 15 δράκων λίθος ἐγένετο; Quint. Smyrn. 12, 507; Bel 28; 4 Macc 18:7) οἱ λίθοι ἄρτοι γίνονται the stones turn into loaves Mt 4:3. τὸ αἵμα αὐτοῦ λίθον γεγενημένον GJs 24:3. ὁ λόγος σὰρξ ἐγένετο J 1:14
Notice Mt 4:3 with loaves becoming bread, same syntax.
So you are ok with the Word became a human being from Louw-Nida but not the Word is a human being?
Would the stone become bread and then you say the stone is not bread?