We are still left with what I said before. This could be referring to the name of a person very easily and this is just a literal translation of that as opposed to the name itself. Obviously, having a clear name in the text of the messiah would mean everybody would be named that, right?
http://books.google.com/books?id=_b...ee+paraphrase+Isaiah#v=snippet&q=lamb&f=false So, I'd say
this is not conclusive enough to say that messiah has to be HaShem.
Also, it would still be unfulfilled in your idea. Jesus was never king of Israel, the government never rested on his shoulders, there is no world peace, etc.
Other rabbis put Moses and David into Isaiah 53. Others said all righteous people who suffer are seen in Isaiah 53. Yes, some did say messiah was in there, but for the suffering, never for the dying. It was never believed the messiah would need two chances to complete the work, nor was it believed that the messiah would die for sins.
But this does not really answer all the other problems with making Israel the suffering lamb, including the fact that the destruction of the temple coincided with mass apostasy amongst the Jewish people. It's just saying that we can read something into it, if we squint really hard, even though logic and reality does not support it. And the idea that if Israel suffers more, there will be more peace, seems pretty crazy and counterproductive for the Jews who would preferably avoid another holocaust.
The great problem, and the pattern, with all these interpretations of yours is that they do a lot to remove the most natural meaning of the scriptures. Hezekiah, for example, was never called "The Everlasting Father," nor was his reign marked with peace and expansion. Just the opposite, actually. And this peace and expansion was not slated to continue forever and ever... in fact, the end of his reign is marked by the prophecy of Isaiah that his sons would be taken into bondage, and the princes would all be made eunuchs in the Babylonian court. The appelation of "peace everlasting" and a Kingdom without end are all direct appellations for the Messiah Himself, the "Savior," who is the only one with a Kingdom that will last forever.
But since the time of Hezekiah, the scepter has long left the family of David, Israel was reduced to being a province, and finally even the Temple was torn to pieces. Notice also that the promises to Daniel, which included an end to sin and was given in the sense of good tidings, ended itself in the destruction of the Temple, which was later fulfilled in 70ad! And what was it that Jacob said? "The sceptre shall not depart from Judah, nor a lawgiver from between his feet, until Shiloh come; and unto him shall the gathering of the people be."
This time has come and long gone, and who else came besides Jesus the Messiah? But instead of embracing Him, you would rather make the interpretation of scripture so convoluted as to have no sense or pattern! To make them fit, one must ignore history and the things that happened with each individual who is replaced into these scriptures! But with Christ, it is a perfect match.
Isaiah 7, a virgin will conceive and bring forth a Son, and He shall be called Immanuel, God with us. In Genesis, the serpent is told that he would be crushed by the seed of the woman. In Genesis 12, Abraham is promised that through him all the families of the world would be blessed. (Who can do this but Christ, who offers salvation for all who come to Him? Or do you still suppose Israel is the sacrificial lamb of all the world? And what would the Kings shut their mouths at, and consider things they had never heard, if not the Gospel whose prophetic origins were never heard by them? Isaiah 52) In Micah 5:2 "But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting." Who else came from Bethlehem, but Jesus Christ, whose goings forth have been from old? Who came to heal the sick, and open the eyes of the blind, as Isaiah 35? Who came riding upon an ass into Jerusalem, as in Zechariah 9? And yet do you suppose the Messiah would be grand and full of pomp, who would not be sold for thirty pieces of silver (Zech 11, Amos 2)? He was rejected of men, a King detestable to the world. Isaiah 53 shows the suffering Christ, taken to prison and delivered to judgment as an "offering for sin." His enemies would surround Him; they would crucify Him, and laugh Him to scorn (Psalm 22). He would suffer and would be cut off, as in Daniel 9, but yet he would "prolong his days," and He will "see His seed." In Psalm 16:10, it further shows that Christ must rise from the grave. "For thou wilt not leave my soul in hell; neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption." David has long been dead, and his bones long buried in Israel. So who is this Holy One, if not the Messiah, who rose again and ascended on high? (Psa 110:1 The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool.) So Christ needed to suffer, and conquer over sin and death, and now He sits in heaven till God makes His enemies His footstool.
The evidence is so heavy, how can you carry it and dismiss it?