I submitted a paper in a reputed journal (Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences) and after two months I received an Editorial decision of Major Revision. In that case, three reviewers were invited and out of those, two gave positive reviews whereas the other review was negative and possibly rejection.
Anyways, I made the revisions and addressed the concerns of the reviewers and resubmitted the manuscript. Again after two months, I received the Editorial decision which was again Major revision. This time editor sent the paper to three reviewers again and the opinions were split. Two reviewers again gave positive comments and recommended this can be published after some minor revisions. The third reviewer comments were extremely nasty and suggested rejection straight away.
Now I am confused what to do? Is this is a sign of eventual rejection, even though the Editor has given it Major Revision? I do not even know, how much importance the editor has given to the nasty comments by the Third Reviewer and also how should I respond to those nasty comments? I would be very grateful if the experts here help me out with this.