Genesis 40

Joseph Interprets a Dream

In this chapter, we are transported straight to dreamland and their interpretations. We have two guys; one the Pharaoh’s baker and the other cup-bearer joining Joseph in gulag where he[Joseph] is still head honcho. These two new prisoners, who are in prison for reasons that are unclear to me, both dream. Their dreams are similar in structure and differ only in detail and as such I find a difficulty in understanding why the interpretations are different. Joseph tells them that interpretations belong to god but goes ahead to do it. Is he god?

I don’t know about you, but there is no way I can have a long face for dreaming about vines, wines, grapes and so on. Or for that matter dreaming about bread baskets. If having such a dream gives you the freaks, you need help. And it is these two dreams that the two gentlemen had, wore long faces and Joseph set to interpret. Since the two men have no names, we can as well say they are cardboard characters, mentioned only for effect.

What I want us to pay attention to however, is from 12 Then Joseph said to him, “This is the interpretation of it: the three branches are three days; 13 within three more days Pharaoh will lift up your head and restore you to your office; and you will put Pharaoh’s cup into his hand according to your former custom when you were his cup-bearer. 14 Only keep me in mind when it goes well with you, and please do me a kindness by mentioning me to Pharaoh and get me out of this house. The reason this is important if you haven’t noticed is similar to what happens in the new testament in the story of Jesus. The three days represent the 3 days he is said to have died while the second part is the words of one of the guys nailed with him who asked to be remembered when he goes to the house of the father.

The next dream also has a similar import. I will just show the interpretation by Joseph and I hope you will be able to draw parallels with the new testament stories. 18 Then Joseph answered and said, “This is its interpretation: the three baskets are three days; 19 within three more days Pharaoh will lift up your head from you and will hang you on a tree, and the birds will eat your flesh off you.”

I also need to mention another important parallel in this story that the writers of the gospel stories could have made use of since by now me and you are aware that they could have access to the OT material, the Torah and other Hebrew text. And this is it, apart from the 3 days that are very symbolic is the people arrested one is cup-bearer and another baker. In the NT, Jesus asks his disciples to take wine and drink as a symbol of his blood for the forgiveness of sins and bread as his flesh. In fact, we can say confidently that the scribes creating the mythical Jesus could have given these and other stories as we shall see flesh to make him credible.

The only difference however as I can see is that the cup-bearer doesn’t remember Joseph.

Joseph interprets dreams painting adapted from


About makagutu

As Onyango Makagutu I am Kenyan, as far as I am a man, I am a citizen of the world

8 thoughts on “Genesis 40

  1. archaeopteryx1 says:

    What a GREAT catch! I must have read this chapter over a dozen times, and I’ve never made the connection between the cup-bearer, the baker and the Eucharist, or the two thieves either, for that matter! I am SO gonna steal that!!!!! (But I will credit you –)


    • makagutu says:

      Thank you. You were my teacher when I began, I can’t say more than that the teacher is allowed to steal as much as he wishes!


  2. j. says:

    He he he ……. With all due respect, In deed your thoughts on the Joseph account are RANDOM THOUGHTS! For they are neither SCIENTIFICALLY, HISTORICALLY or otherwise honest. Please do your homework on Jesus! He is an authenticated Historical figure! SERIOUS Historians don’t dispute his existence & crucifixion! The contention is his resurrection not his existence! The scribes and pharisees were his arch enemies. How could they then “create him” What would they benefit?


    • makagutu says:

      j. when you say historians, who do you mean? When you object to a proposition you should provide the evidence and reasons for your objections! You mention random thoughts because that’s is the title of the blog or because you have a genuine objection to the content of what is presented? Since you have a feeling I haven’t done my homework, I suggest that you point me to the records if you may then we will continue this discussion.


    • @j. By your comment, I suspect you don’t know a great deal about the Bible. The four “Gospels,” “Matthew,” Mark,” “Luke” and “John,” were written anonymously. “Mark,” in 70 AD, “Matthew,” about 75 AD, “Luke,” around 90 AD, and “John,” most likely around 150 AD – it wasn’t until 240 AD, that the Church decided they must have been written by Matthew (Levi, the tax collector), John Mark (a friend of Barnabas), Luke (a physician and companion of Paul), and James, brother of Jesus, whose real name, by the way (if he ever existed), would have been Yeshua, not Jesus – Jesus was the Greek translation of the Jewish name, Yeshua.

      So to the best of anyone’s knowledge J., including biblical historians, if anyone ever actually met Yeshua, they never wrote about it, and certainly, the four anonymous writers who wrote the four Gospels, never met the man. Thirty-five years passed after his alleged crucifixion, before a single book was ever written about him – don’t you think that if he was seen walking on water, turning water into wine, changing a few fish and loaves of bread into a banquet for thousands, bringing people, including himself, back from the dead, levitating up into the sky, that people would have been falling all over themselves to write about it? But no, they waited 35 years for the first edition to ever hit Barnes and Noble! That’s how excited they were —


      • Do this, J., just as an experiment – read the “Gospel of Mark,” which all biblical historians agree was the first one of the four written. Now John Mark was not a disciple – even if Yeshua had really existed, John Mark would never have met him, he would only have been writing from stories he had heard others tell.

        Then read the “Gospel of Matthew” – as I mentioned, “Matthew” was the Greek translation of the Jewish name, “Levi,” (the entire New Testament was originally written in Greek, and had to be translated into English) and Levi, according to the New Testament, was the tax collector Yeshua asked to become his disciple, so Levi WOULD have actually been there (IF Yeshua ever existed). But if you have carefully read both books, you will notice that Matthew very often copies Mark’s story, WORD FOR WORD! Yet Mark wasn’t there, and Matthew would have been. Ask yourself this: if the REAL Matthew had written the Gospel According to Matthew, why would he need to copy the work of one who wasn’t there? Wouldn’t he have his own story to tell, and have no need to copy someone else’s?


      • Here’s another one for you J. – go to the book of Luke and read that famous story of how Yeshua was strolling along the shores of the Sea of Galilee, and spotted Simon/Peter, his brother Andrew, and brothers James and John, the sons of Zebedee, the fisherman, unloading their boats. And Yeshua said to them, “Follow me, and I will make you fishers of men.” Dramatic, memorable story, isn’t it? Of course old Zebedee wasn’t too happy about having to call a temp service to get a couple of day laborers to replace his sons, but they had their green cards, so it turned out alright.

        Of course the Book of Luke was supposedly written by Luke, the Syrian physician, Paul’s companion, who, like Paul, wasn’t there and had never met Yeshua. But let’s turn to the Gospel of John, who (if he actually wrote it) woulld have been one of the sons of Zebedee, and WOULD have actually been there. Skim through it until you get to the part about when he meets and decides to follow Yeshua. John, according to his book, and his brother, James, were followers of John, the Baptist, when John spotted Yeshua strolling along the river bank on the other side of the Jordan River. He waded across, chatted with Yeshua a bit, then Yeshua suggested John follow him to the home of a friend, where he had planned to spend the night. They stayed up late, talking, and the next morning, they walked back to the river, where John collected his brother, James, and the two of them followed Yeshua.

        Not exactly a “fishers of men” kind of story, is it? So which of the two, in this “inerrant” book, is telling the truth, and which is not. Or are either?

        Study the Bible, J., then study the times and conditions of the periods in which the Bible was written, then study the people who supposedly wrote the Bible, then study historians who study the Bible professionally, and by that, I don’t just mean Christian apologist websites, read Bart Ehrman, Richard Friedman, authors who study the Bible critically. Once you’ve done that, you just may have learned enough to come back and carry on an intelligent conversation about the Bible.

        See you then —


        • makagutu says:

          I suggest that while he is at it and enjoying the history he should look at The Bible Unearthed: Archaeology’s New Vision of Ancient Israel and the Origin of Its Sacred Texts and Isaac Asimov’s guide to the bible then he can come back and have a conversation. Until then we wish him happy reading.


We sure would love to hear your comments, compliments and thoughts.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s