Nonsense. And you still haven’t addressed the fact that the disciples are referred to in the third person.
I'll quote Don Carson word for word on John 1:14,
"In the context of incarnation, the
we who saw the Word's glory must refer to the Evangelist and other Christians who actually saw Jesus in the days of his earthly life". (D. Carson, The Gospel according to John, p 128). Doesn't sound like nonsense to me. That is the natural way to understand it.
Are you saying, why would the author refer to himself and other eyewitnesses as 'we' in one place, but then use the third person, "his disciples", instead of 'we', in another (eg 2:11)? If so, then interpreting 'his disciples' as indicating that he
isn't one of the Twelve or the 'we' of 1:14, would thus lead you to interpret 'beholding his glory' in 1:14 in the sense of
contemplating his glory instead of seeing it physically.
One reason why I would disagree with you is that John's gospel was written before the Battle Hymn of the Republic. Interpretation of John 1:14 is not dependent on that hymn, but should be based on the immediate context, as Carson indicates.
If the author meant that he witnessed Jesus physically, would it really be unnatural for him to refer to the disciples in the third person, or could there be another reason? Especially if 2:11 is set the day after the calling of Andrew, Simon Peter, Philip and Nathaniel. At that point he has only mentioned those disciples, so it is appropriate to use the third person.
I think it is Meyer who says that the 'us' and 'we' in 1:14 refers to "all who did receive him, who believed in his name" in verse 12. I don't think the author would have used both 'us' and 'we' if he wasn't in that category.