No one would expect Genesis to be anything other than the first book of the Bible, but God has attested in Isaiah chapter 1 that Genesis is the first book of the Bible. Isaiah chapter 1 matches stories from the first four chapters of Genesis with a focus on the Garden and Cain.
The opening verse of Isaiah identifies the prophet in question, Isaiah, and the time of his prophetic revelation.
13 Isaiah 1:1
1The vision of Isaiah the son of Amoz, which he saw concerning Judah and Jerusalem in the days of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah, kings of Judah.
This verse does not connect to Genesis in a way that I understand, but does serve to introduce us to the person God is speaking to/through. It also helps us identify which part of the book of Isaiah matches the book of Isaiah. You can peek at the answer if you want, but the bottom line is the 13th chapter of Isaiah begins with an almost identical statement identifying that section of Isaiah as a match to the book of Isaiah itself. For these reasons it's important for the book to begin this way even if this opening thought does not relate to the book of Genesis.
The first match to Genesis begins with Isaiah 1:2. It's a match with creation and the fall in one sweeping statement. Compare the Isaiah quote on the left with the opening line of Genesis on the right.
|
13 Isaiah 1:2 |
1 Genesis 1:1 |
In Isaiah God speaks to the skies and land and tells them to listen up. It's an echo of the creation story, the story of God speaking things into existence. The point is clear, if he has the ability to create with speech, those things he makes should listen when he has something to say to them. Problem is his creation closed their ears. His children who he spoke into existence would not listen. We went against his desire and ate from the tree he asked us not to eat from.
The story of eating the forbidden fruit is well known. Isaiah has a rendition of the same story. Here are the two side by side.
|
13 Isaiah 1:3 |
1 Genesis 3:1-6 |
God is saying through Isaiah that 1) the ox knows who his owner is and 2) the donkey knows which feeding trough he can eat from. In Genesis Adam and Eve listened to the serpent instead of their owner and they ate from the wrong tree.
As the story unfolds Adam and Eve realize they are naked and hide when God comes near. Isaiah covers this detail in verse 4.
|
13 Isaiah 1:4 |
1 Genesis 3:8 |
This verse in Isaiah states several things in past tense, so it must match a detail in the story in Genesis given after Adam and Eve ate the forbidden fruit. I think it matches the point in the story when they hid.
In the Genesis account God speaks to Adam and Eve and the serpent about what the consequences will be. The story then goes on to explain that God provided clothing to cover Adam and Eve's nakedness. Many have noted that the clothing are actually animal skins, and that means an animal lost it's life. This shedding of blood points to what Jesus would eventually do for the whole race to reverse the consequences that came on us through Adam. In Isaiah 1:5-6 this shedding of blood is also mentioned.
|
13 Isaiah 1:5-6 |
1 Genesis 3:21 |
By the shedding of blood Adam and Eve are covered. In Isaiah's version it's like dressing a wound with a bandage.
Isaiah covers the exodus from the garden in terms that seem distant until one realizes Isaiah is trying to add information not provided in the original account. On the strength of the series of matches Isaiah can insert new information on occassion without throwing off our ability to see the matches. This particular match is the first of many I saw working this way. Comparing the two quotes below, they appear unrelated at worse and distant at best, but they are likely really close in terms of what actually happened on the ground.
|
13 Isaiah 1:7-9
|
1 Genesis 3:24-4:0 |
The reference in Isaiah to Sodom and Gomorrah is a good match to what happened in Eden. In the case of Sodom and Gomorrah, Lot and his wife were escorted from Sodom by angels because the cities were destroyed by fire. In the case of Eden an angel or cherubim escorted Adam and his wife from Eden and uses fire to block the way back. It's not a perfect match, but really close. The only detail that seems amis is actually an argument from silence. We assume Eden was not destroyed because the account in Genesis does not say that it was. If Isaiah is a second witness to the same events, and we have correctly aligned his witness to Genesis, then what actually happened in Eden is closer to what happened in Sodom then not.
If you think about the situation in Isaiah's day, he's likely looking out at the land of Judah ablaze from within the walls of Jerusalem, just trying to survive the Assyrian onslought along with the remnant. In fact, we know from Isaiah's account and the account in Second Kings that the only reason Isaiah and Hezekiah and their remnant lived through the siege was by an act of God when he sent an angel to slay the Assyrian soldiers. The point is Isaiah's experience looks and smells a lot like Lot's and a lot like Adam's when the three are compared.
The story now shifts gears to what happens post Eden. The first story in Genesis 4 is Cain and Abel making an offering to God. Abel's offering is pleasing while Cain's is not.
|
13 Isaiah 1:10-14
|
1 Genesis 4:3-5 |
Isaiah must be playing to Cain's offering, which was displeasing, because God is not happy, but he was pleased with Abel's offering. Whatever the problem was with Cain's offering is likely the same problem Isaiah was addressing around the altar in Solomon's temple in his own day. The two accounts can be used to understand one another. That these two match so obviously also establishes that we are correctly aligning Isaiah and Genesis.
Genesis reveals that Cain killed his brother Abel when he saw that God was pleased with Abel's offering, but not his own. Isaiah picks up on this detail of Cain's story and addresses Cain directly in much the same way God addressed him in the Genesis account. Compare the two to see the number of matches within this alignment.
|
13 Isaiah 1:15-17 |
1 Genesis 4:8-10 |
Blood is the issue in both accounts. The passage in Isaiah says to put away evil and do good. In Genesis it's God's desire that Cain be his brother's keeper, though he was not. In Isaiah God is not going to hear prayer. In the Genesis account it is eventually discovered that the land is not even going to respond to farming. The next match covers more of the consequences of Cain's actions.
Cain is told in Genesis that he will not be able to farm the land as a result of shedding Abel's blood. Compare this to the Isaiah account.
|
13 Isaiah 1:18-20 |
1 Genesis 4:11-14 |
The Isaiah account says Cain could have eaten from the land if he had met with and reasoned with God and if he was willing and obedient to God afterwards. We know from Genesis this never happened and Cain became a nomad instead, so we also know he did not reason with God. Basically, Cain was unrepentent for what he did.
Cain's story ends with the account of his city in the east. The Isaiah passage has quite a bit to say about the city where murderers dwell. Given the way Isaiah has already identified Cain as a murderer, the city Isaiah is talking about is Cain's city, the city he named Enoch.
|
13 Isaiah 1:21-2:0
|
1 Genesis 4:16-17
|
Why Isaiah would focus so much column space on a city we apparently know nothing else about from Scripture is hard to understand. However, we already know the mode of letting the prophet add data not provided in the base account in Genesis if only we know we are properly aligned. Given the way Cain builds a city after killing his brother and Isaiah chapter 1 talks about the city where murderers live it's hard to get the alignment wrong. It's just a question of how to understand what Isaiah is adding to the story of Cain's mysterious city.