Rook: Hello, I don't know who you are because you didn't leave a name. I'm going to assume you did it because you forgot, and not out of arrogance. My name is Rook Hawkins. I'm on Dennis McKinsey's Biblical Panel, we help answer some of his e-mail. Dennis probably mailed you already, and if not he will do so soon enough.

Rook: Name one please.

Rook: If you bothered at all to read the hundreds of back issues of Dennis McKinsey's periodical, "Biblical Errancy" you'll know that he already showed that Isaiah 53 was already answered. For reference here, I'll just post the key points to make it easy on you. It's obvious you care nothing for hard research, you are even too lazy to take caplocks off when you type.

1. (1) "Behold, my servant shall prosper (Isa. 52:13 RSV). When did Jesus prosper? How can a condition of prosperity or success be predicated of the Godhead?
2. (2) "He shall be exalted and extolled, and be very high" (52:13). This was not fulfilled in Jesus either. His humanity was condemned to death in an inglorious manner. This verse implies he was not high and exalted before, which would be contrary to his divinity. It also contradicts Isa. 53:3 ("He is despised and rejected of men" and Isa. 57:15 which says God (Jesus) is high and exalted continually. Exaltation is not a condition he will attain.
3. (3) "...his visage was so marred more than any man, and his form more than the sons of men" (52:14). If Jesus was God, how could his features have suffered disfigurement and when was his visage marred more than that of all others? This verse also contradicts the alleged description of Jesus given in Psalm 45:2 ("Thou are fairer than the children of men".
4. (4) "...the kings shall shut their mouths because of him" (52:15 RSV). What king ceased to speak because of Jesus?
5. (5) "For he shall grow up" (53:2). This should have been translated, "he grew up," as is done in the RSV, which would show someone living before Isaiah was under discussion.
6. (6) "...he had no form or comeliness that we should look at him, and no beauty that we should desire him" (53:2). (a) Like 52:14 (See #3 above), this contradicts the description of Jesus in Psalm 45:2 and Jer. 11:16. (b) If this describes Jesus' condition at death, there is nothing singular about it, because it applies to all dead people.
7. (7) "He is despised and rejected of men" (53:3). (a) According to 52:13, he was to be "exalted and extolled, and be very high." (b) How many people really hated Jesus as opposed to the number of tribes who hated the Jews?
8. ( "...a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief..." (53:3). (a) Jewish scholars claim "grief" as used here only refers to bodily ailment in Scripture. Jesus had no bodily ailment. Nowhere in the NT does it say Jesus had so much as a headache prior to the cross, nor is his death ever referred to as a sickness. (b) The Jews had no conception of a suffering Messiah. They thought of him as a king or ruler over willing subjects and subduing his enemies.
9. (9) "...we hid as it were our faces from him" (53:3). The Jews did not hide their faces from him but condemned him many times and the Gentiles accepted him.
10. (10) "his visage was so marred" (52:14) and "we hid," "he was despised," "we esteemed" (53:3) and "he hath borne," "smitten of God and afflicted" (53:4) and "he was wounded," "he was bruised" (53:5) and "He was oppressed, and he was afflicted" (53:6) and "He was taken and cut off" (53: and "he made his grave" and "he had done no violence" (53:9). All these past tense verbs show that Isaiah is referring to an earlier individual, not someone living 700 years in the future.
11. (11) "yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten by God, and afflicted" (53:4). Jesus was smitten by men not God. Would God smite and afflict his son, Christ, especially when the two are supposedly identical?
12. (12) "Surely he hath borne our griefs and carried our sorrows; yet we esteemed him stricken, smitten by God, and afflicted. But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities" (53:4-5). (a) This refers to Israel. Prophets often designated humiliations and adversities as sicknesses and wounds. Isa. 1:5-6, Jer. 10:19, 30:17-18, 33:6-8, Lam. 2:13, and Hosea 6:1 all describe the Captivity as attended with calamities described as bruises and wounds. (b) Contrary to Matt. 8:16-17 ("...they brought unto Jesus many that were possessed with devils: and he cast out the spirits with his word, and healed all that were sick: That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by Isaias, the prophet, saying, Himself took our infirmities, and bare our sicknesses" which claims to fulfill this prophecy, 53:4-5 says nothing about casting out devils or curing sicknesses as does Matt. 8:16-17.
13. (13) "Behold my servant shall deal prudently" (52:13). (a) There is no reason to believe that the servant referred to is Jesus. "Servant" refers to anyone who works hard for God. It is used in reference to Moses (Num. 12:7, Job 1:, all the prophets (Amos 3:7), and all of Israel (Lev. 25:42). The servant is expressly identified with Jacob or Israel in Isa. 41:8-9, 42:19, 44:1-2, and 49:3. Judging from the context, it refers to the Jews or Jacob, God's people, not Jesus. (b) The phrases applied to Jehovah in connection with the servant ("he that formed thee" and "I have redeemed thee" suit Israel alone, not Jesus. Jehovah is often called Israel's Redeemer. (c) How could Jesus (God) be God's servant? Would it make sense to call Christ God's servant, or would a prophet call him a servant? How could Jesus (God) be termed the servant of anybody? It would be an indignity to apply "servant" to the godhead. (d) Although debatable, Jewish scholars seem to feel that "deal prudently" actually means "to acquire knowledge;" yet, how could an all-knowing God acquire knowledge as this would imply he previously lacked wisdom.
14. (14) "he was wounded for our transgressions" (53:5). According to Christian theology, Jesus was not so much bruised or wounded for man's transgressions as he was killed.
15. (15) "He was oppressed,...yet he opened not is mouth:...so he openeth not his mouth" (53:7). According to John 18:21-23 ("Why askest thou me? ask them which heard me, what I have said unto them: behold, they know what I said. And when he had thus spoken, one of the officers which stood by struck Jesus with the palm of his hand, saying, Answerest thou the high priest so? Jesus answered him, If I have spoken evil, bear witness of the evil: but if well, why smitest thou me?", John 18:33-37 ("Then Pilate...said to Jesus, Art thou King of the Jews? Jesus answered him, Sayest thou this thing of thyself, or did others tell it thee of me?...Jesus answered, Thou sayest that I am king", and Matt. 27:46 ("Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying,...my God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?", Jesus not only opened his mouth when oppressed but was struck in the process. He even cried for help.
16. (16) "...for he was cut off out of the land of the living" (53: contradicts Psalm 116:9 which says, "I will walk before the Lord in the land of the living."
17. (17) "for the transgressions of my people was he stricken" (53:. Yet, Jesus was supposedly stricken for all people, not just my people.
18. (18) "And he made his grave with the wicked and with the rich in his death" (53:9). (a) When was Jesus buried with anyone? (b) When was Jesus with the rich in his death or buried with the rich? (c) This description contradicts the glorious burial predicted in Isaiah 11:10 ("And in that day there shall be a root of Jesse,...and his rest shall be glorious". (d) Actually, in so far as Jesus is concerned, the prophecy was reversed. Jesus made his grave with the righ by being buried in the sepulchre of the rich Joseph of Arimathoea (Matt. 27:57), and was with the wicked, crucified thieves (not rich people) in his death.
19. (19) "because he had done no violence" (53:9). John 2:15 ("And when he had made a scourge of small cords, he drove them all out of the temple, and poured out the changers' money, and overthrew the tables" and Mark 11:15 clearly prove the inapplicability of this verse to Jesus.
20. (20) "...neither was any deceit in his mouth" (53:9). Anyone who seriously believes this refers to Jesus should read the commentaries in issues 24, 25, 26, and 27.
21. (21) "Yet it pleased the Lord to bruise him" (53:10). (a) Would God be pleased to bruise Christ, his only begotten son and equal or to put him to grief? (b) Applying this verse to Jesus would seem to prove that he did not come of his own accord to meet death. The pleasure was not in him but in the Creator. (c) If Jesus wished to save the wicked from perdition, then he assumed responsibility for his sufferings, and it is wrong to argue that God willed it. (d) And this verse is clearly in opposition to the description of God given in Lam. 3:33 ("For he doth not afflict willingly nor grieve the children of men".
22. (22) "...when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin" (53:10). But wasn't the body of Jesus offered as a sacrifice, not his soul?
23. (23) "he shall see his seed" (53:10). (a) Throughout the OT "seed" always meant children or physical descendants. Yet, Jesus had no children. (b) If "seed" refers to Jesus' disciples then the prophet should have written "sons" because "seed" refers to those produced by carnal acts.
24. (24) "...he shall prolong his days" (53:10). (a) The verse means he shall live long; whereas, Jesus did not live to an old age. He died when he was approximately 33 years old. (b) Actually Psalm 55:23 is much more applicable. "But thou O God, shalt bring them down into the pit of destruction: bloody and deceitful men shall not live out half their days." Jesus did not live out half his days. (c) It's difficult to see how this could be applied to a divine being since the idea of longevity is inappropriate to an eternal Diety.
25. (25) "And the pleasure of the Lord shall prosper in his hand" (53:10). Jesus has come and gone yet the world that God desires has never materialized.
26. (26) "He shall see the travail of his soul" (53:11). I thought only the flesh of Jesus suffered, not his soul or divinity.
27. (27) "Therefore will I divide him a portion with the great" (53:12). (a) If Jesus is not great, then who are the great? (b) When did Jesus ever divide a portion with the great? (c) Who could divide him his portion, since he is God? Who is the I?
28. (28) "...and he shall divide the spoil with the strong" (53:12). (a) Jesus divides spoils? Would a perfectly good being be dividing spoils? Nowhere do we read that he plundered or divided spoils with the strong. (b) This verse implies Jesus was not one of the strong which would contradict John 17:2 ("As thou hast given him power over all flesh".
29. (29) "...he poured out his soul to death" (53:12). (a) I thought only the flesh of Jesus underwent death. (b) Jesus did not die willingly for his creatures. He feared and prayed as is shown by Matt. 26:37-39 ("And he took with him Peter and the two sons of Zebedee, and began to be sorrowful and very heavy. Then saith he unto them, My soul is exceeding sorrowful, even unto death:...and he went a little farther, and fell on his face, and prayed, saying, O my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me..." and Matt. 27:46 ("My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?".
30. (30) "This is the heritage of the servants of the Lord" (54:17). Here servants is plural, showing that more than one servant is referred to in Isaiah 53.
31. (31) And lastly, immediately before Isaiah 52:13-53:12 Isaiah is predicting the gathering of the exiles and just after Isa. 54:1 he is talking of the glorious promises descriptive of the same events. Therefore, logically, all inbetween is speaking of the same thing. The conclusion to be drawn from all the above is that if Isa. 52-53 is the strongest reference to Jesus in the OT, then the case for messianic prophecy is weak indeed.

You are asuming the case in point. You have not even proven that jesus existed, you certainly haven't shown any empirical evidence Jesus was the messiah. You claim alot and prove nothing. If you wish to be taken the slightest bit seriously, remove your finger from the Caplocks key.

Your answers are no more then your attempt to decieve and lie to us about your mythology. Instead of proving you have asserted. Where you should have provided evidence you provided falsehoods. So far you are not looking like much more then a fool with a big mouth. I suggest you get back to studying.

The best, of course...
Rook Hawkins