Common Ground on John 1:1

John 1:1 seems to me to be the only scripture that supports the Trinitarian position. The Trinitarians have an entire vocabulary which they insist is THE truth, as in, if you disagree you are a heretic, but it is almost entirely non-scriptural. Here is the list: "Trinity", "essence" or "substance" or "nature", "person" (in reference to God and Christ), "hypostasis", "Godhead", "very God".

The word "hypostasis" is used in Hebrews 1:3, but the English versions usually translate it as "nature", to make it more confusing. In Philippians 2:6, the word usually translated "nature", is "morphe", not "ousia", so this doesn't help the Trinitarians.

I don't have an interest in calling the Trinitarians heretics, I am just asking them to back off on their arrogance, and consider that another point of view is acceptable. It don't know how you get from John 1:1 that the Logos has the same essence as the Father, when the word essence isn't used.

So here is my proposed common ground:

1. "God" is referred to twice in John 1:1. It can't have the same meaning in both places. The first use is to God the Father. The second use is to divinity. So this could be better translated: "In the beginning was the Logos, and the Logos was with God, and the Logos was divine."
2. The divinity of the Son is derived from the Father - it isn't a stand-alone attribute. Jesus is not another god. He is not God. He is the Son of God.