First of all, just because he was exalted doesn't mean he was the Messiah in relation to Isaiah (or any other OT prophecy.) We're waiting on a chapter and verse from you for this. Kings were worshiped and exalted too.

You still have not shown how the contradition of Isa. 53:3 ("He is despised and rejected of men" and Isa. 57:15 which says God (Jesus) is high and exalted continually, doesn't exist.

Perhaps. Referring. The bible says what it says already. Just because you don't like what it says, you feel the need to correct it by speculating what the authors meant to say, when what was meant to say was clearly written.

Try not to use the Passions movie as a reference, it wasn't very biblical, and Mel took more liberties with that then when they filmed Braveheart. Jesus' features were never marred. He might have been stabbed cut and whipped (This is mostly dogmatic...really he was just crucified.) But never was he marred beyond all repair. You'll be hard pressed to find such a verse.

If you don't know, it's intellectually dishonest to just disagree because you don't want it to be there. It's more intellectually dishonest to put quotes around something as if to somehow invalidate it when you haven't.

There is a lot of speculation and no answers. This verse STILL contradicts the supposed description of Jesus given in Psalm 45:2 ("Thou are fairer than the children of men". You have not answered the question, just side-stepped around it.

"...the kings shall shut their mouths because of him" (52:15 RSV). How does putting it in that sentence change the fact that no king ever ceased talking? Further you've dug yourself into a greater hole here, what nations did he startle? He certainly didn't cause any big uprising in Rome, no city-state was disturbed on his account. He just died supposedly. (We won't get into the fact that he was supposed to be God, and a God can't die to begin with) You're stretching. And you're about to reach too far.

How much clearer could it have been made? In the KJV, it was mistranslated (purposely) to say "He shall grow up" from the original which was "He grew up" The difference in tense puts the person Isaiah is talking about BEFORE Isaiah's time.

Once more, you'll be hard pressed, indeed, you have been hard pressed to solve anything, from the looks of all the speculation, assumption and rationalization.

You're mixing things up a bit. See above answer for refutation of your thoughts.

Correction. This is a site devoted to exposing the flows, contradictions and errors in the Bible. What anybody thinks is irrelevent. Good luck showing a single time Dennis said BE was devoted to refuting claims of Jesus and the other people mentioned in the Bible.

Way to dodge the question. I'll repeat it. How many people really hated Jesus as opposed to the number of tribes who hated the Jews?

Please go to [url=http://www.aish.com/spirituality/philosophy/Why_Dont_Jews_Believe_In_Jesus$.asp] Why Jews Don't Believe In Jesus[/url] and Ask the Rabbi. I'm sure you'll find your answers there.

I think the Jewish scholars know hebrew far better then you do. Further, since the original manuscripts don't exist, it's hard to compare the texts to anything. Moreover, being that there are so many errors, as you admit, how can you trust the Bible at all? Ah...I see...you must be one of those people who picks and chooses what they like about the bible, and disgard the rest. How honest of you.

Non-sequitor. Since the argument is not translation error, it's that you Christians are taking a word and applying the wrong definition to it. If the Hebrew word for grief, used in isaiah, means bodily ailment, then THAT IS WHAT IT MEANS. Comprende? There is no refuting that.

How non-sequitor can you get. NOWHERE in the OT was the messiah supposed to suffer as a requisite for being the messiah. What about that do you not understand?

Further, you are claiming the very point in dispute, that this is a prophetic statement, something you have yet to prove. You want to skip the cross examination and go right to being acquitted. Something that is not going to happen while I'm here.

Now you're really stretching here. "And as one from whom hide their face from..." WHERE in the HELL do you see "And as one whom we hold up to the level in which we should hide our face from..." This is another case in point example of YOU trying to claim something that just isn't there. The text says what it wanted to say, you don't like it, so you add all this other bullshit to the text. I hate dishonest people.

Non-sequitor. And completely speculation I might add. Way to assert much and prove nothing.

You can try, but facts are stubborn things and your thickheadedness is already showing through.