“Maybe some have believed Paul’s hyperbolic interpretation of Isaiah, but Judaism soundly rejected and rejects that the “Suffering Servant” is a man, much less a man called Jesus, let alone God, precisely based on the OT scripture, just as it rejected the Christian interpretation of Ps 110:1 a fabricated corruption.”
Scripture is clear that some did believe and some did not:
Act 17:11-14, “The people of Berea were more open-minded than the people of Thessalonica. They were very willing to receive God’s message, and every day they carefully examined the Scriptures to see if what Paul said was true. Many of them became believers, and quite a number of them were prominent Greek men and women. But when the Jews in Thessalonica found out that Paul was also spreading God’s word in Berea, they went there to upset and confuse the people. The believers immediately sent Paul to the seacoast, but Silas and Timothy stayed in Berea.”
Isaiah had already prophesied that some would not believe:
Isa 53:1-2, “Who hath believed our report? And to whom is the arm of the LORD revealed? For he shall grow up before him as a tender plant, and as a root out of a dry ground: he hath no form or comeliness; and when we shall see him, [there is] no beauty that we should desire him.
Jesus picked up the Isaiah prophecy and applied it to Himself:
Jhn 12:37-41, “But though he had done so many miracles before them, yet they believed not on him: That the saying of Esaias the prophet might be fulfilled, which he spake, Lord, who hath believed our report? And to whom hath the arm of the Lord been revealed? Therefore they could not believe, because that Esaias said again, He hath blinded their eyes, and hardened their heart; that they should not see with [their] eyes, nor understand with [their] heart, and be converted, and I should heal them. These things said Esaias, when he saw his glory, and spake of him.”
Paul applied the Isaiah prophecy to Israel’s disbelief and gave the reason:
Rom 10:13-16, “For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? And how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? And how shall they hear without a preacher? And how shall they preach, except they be sent? As it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things! But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Esaias saith, Lord, who hath believed our report?”
Rom 11:25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles be come in.
Neither Paul nor Luke were exactly unbiased sources, were they? So, why should I accept what they say as a matter of fact?
Isaiah had already prophesied that some would not believe
That is not a prophesy but a well known method of covering all your bases. I prophesy that some people will refuse to believe the earth is round...
People generally do not heed warnings, some try to ride out the calamities, etc. and then become breaking news stories. There will always be unbelievers; that in itself does not prove the "prophesy" is correct.
I warmly recommend that you read Jewish interpretations and provide me with evidence that they don't understand their own scripture better than Christians do.
Jesus picked up the Isaiah prophecy and applied it to Himself:
Jesus, or better yet whoever wrote the verses, supposedly picked up Psalm 100:1 and applied it to him too. The NT was written to show that Jesus was the Messiah. It doesn't mean it proves it. I know you believe it is true, and that's fine with me, but that doens't prove it either.
The bottom line is this: if the requirement to show the Bibe is true is that I must a priori believe it is true, then that is no proof at all. It is ciruclar reasoning.
Paul applied the Isaiah prophecy to Israel’s disbelief and gave the reason...that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles be come in
Giving the reason as an opinion doesn't prove it either. Where is his proof that Israel was blinded until all the elect gentiles are "saved"? That is his theory which is apparently accepted as gospel without a shred of evidence.