Jesus’s Origins (Matthew 1–2) as Cultural Trauma
Abstract
:1. Introduction to Cultural Trauma
2. The Nature of the Pain and the Nature of the Victim in the Story
3. Reading with the Original Audience: The Nature of the Pain and of the Victim
3.1. The Death of the Messiah
3.2. The Destruction of the Temple
4. Relation of the Trauma Victim to the Wider Audience
4.1. Rachel Weeping
4.2. ‘His People’
4.3. ‘God with Us’
5. Attribution of Responsibility
5.1. Who Is Responsible for Jesus’s Death?
5.1.1. The Political Authority Representing Rome
5.1.2. Jerusalem’s Religious Authorities
5.1.3. The People of Jerusalem
5.1.4. God
5.2. Who Is Responsible for the Destruction of the Temple?
6. A Trauma Narrative Read in the 21st Century
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
1 | Garber (2015, pp. 24–44) notes that ‘most explorations of trauma within biblical studies have centred on the experiences of the Babylonian Exile’. This article aims to shed light on how a trauma theory approach might respond to a gap in research that Garber correctly identifies: ‘What traumatic experiences or memories might have given rise to the literature shaped in this period leading up to the Maccabean revolt, the emergence of Christianity, or the destruction of the Second Temple in 70 CE?’ (Garber 2015, pp. 24–44). |
2 | Frechette and Boase (2016, pp. 1–23) argue that ‘Trauma studies affirm the importance of creating a trauma narrative, a coherent narrative capable not only of processing past trauma but also of fostering resilience against further traumatization’. |
3 | |
4 | To illustrate this distinction, Garber uses the image of a wound that comes from a transliteration of the Greek word ‘trauma’. He writes: ‘If trauma is the initial wounding experience, trauma literature could be considered the scar—the visible trace offered by the survivor that points in the direction of the initial experience’ (Garber 2015, pp. 24–44). |
5 | There is a disconnection between the number of generations listed in the genealogy and the summary in v.17. This paper does not purport to find a solution to this problem but underscores the rhetorical effect of placing Jesus’s birth at the end of a structured list that presents Israel’s history as culminating in that event. |
6 | The text could have expressed that David begat Solomon, or that David begat Solomon with Bathsheba, but Matt. 1:6 specifies that ‘Δαυεὶδ δὲ ἐγέννησεν τὸν Σολομῶνα ἐκ τῆς τοῦ Oὐρίου’. This expression contrasts with the book of Samuel, which indicates that Bathsheba was likely David’s lawful wife at the time Solomon was conceived. The wording of the genealogy alludes to David at his worst moment (see Doane 2019, pp. 91–106). |
7 | For a study of the Exile as trauma, see Carr (2014, pp. 67–90). |
8 | To explore history as a narrative explanation that creates a past that readers can recognize to be true, see Janzen (2019b, pp. 163–85). |
9 | |
10 | For a study of John 2:21; 4:19–23 and 11:47–50 as a social trauma response to the events of AD 70, see Reinhartz (2014, pp. 275–88). |
11 | |
12 | Runesson and Gurtner (2020, p. 10) introduce this concept: ‘while diverse approaches and perspectives are contained within this overall trajectory, which we have chosen to call “Matthew within Judaism,” the common ground that may be identified understands the Matthean narrative and the context in which it was produced—its inception history—not as something to be understood against the background of Second Temple Judaism, but as an expression of it’. |
13 | As Carr (2014, p. 158) states, ‘Crucifixion was empire-imposed trauma intended to shatter anyone and any movement that opposed Rome’. |
14 | Matt. 23:17 also shows the importance of the Temple: ‘For which is greater, the gold or the sanctuary that has made the gold sacred?’. |
15 | For a discussion about the destruction of the Temple as a traumatic event for those who believed Jesus to be the Messiah and Son of God, see Reinhartz (2014). She concludes that ‘it seems possible, perhaps even likely, that the destruction of the temple in 70 CE was experienced and understood as traumas by at least some Jewish followers of Christ, especially if, as many scholars now argue, such Jews did not yet position themselves outside of and over-against other Jews’. Pruszinski (2023) argues that destruction of the Jerusalem Temple was one of the traumatic events that likely lie behind the Gospel of John. |
16 | Many factors affect how the events of 70 AD were seen as traumatizing or not. With time, Christians such as Eusebius developed a supersessionist theology using the ruins of Jerusalem as proof of Judaism’s obsolescence (Huntzinger 2020). The Christian proponents of this theology where clearly not traumatized by this event in the way that first century Palestinians followers of Christ could have been. According to Jones (2011, p. 271) ‘The lament penned by the author of 2 Baruch compares for pathos with any found in the Hebrew Bible. The absence of Zion, according to the author, rendered all the actions of man and nature irrelevant as the point to which they tended, namely the sacrificial cult of the temple, had ceased to require them. Let the farmers refrain from sowing and reaping as the first fruits will no longer be offered in the temple. Let the vine no longer produce grapes as the offering of wine will not continue. Indeed, all the happiness of brides and bridegrooms had come to an end; nor need they bring forth children, for the barren had greater claim to rejoice now.’ (2 Bar. 10.6–19). Early rabbinic texts mostly avoid the subject of fall of the temple (Morgenstern 2020). This avoidance of direct treatment of with the destruction of the Jerusalem can be seen as a sign of trauma. Second Temple literature such as 2 Baruch indicates the destruction of Jerusalem as an important and bitter loss. |
17 | To fully appreciate the devastation and trauma of the destruction of Jerusalem and its temple, see Carr (2014, pp. 196–200). |
18 | According to tradition, the destruction of both the first and second Temples occurred on the 9th of the month of Av and is still mourned together annually as the Jewish fast Tisha B’Av. |
19 | Mello (1999, p. 78) proposes a similar interpretation: ‘To what “massacre” Matthew alludes to? That of Bethlehem’s babies or rather—in a veiled form—to the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 CE? (…) I think that the destruction of 70 was the “real massacre of innocents”’. |
20 | |
21 | The other prophetic citations in Matthew 1–2 also help to relate the trauma to a wider audience by linking Jesus’s birth story to other texts that speak about traumatic situations. In the scope of this article, we present Matt. 1:16–18/Jer. 13:15 as an example that can be used to interpret other quotations. |
22 | ‘Jacob tore his garment and put on sackcloth. He mourned for his son many days. All his sons and daughters arose to comfort him, but he refused to be comforted. And he said, “Surely I will go down to my son, to Sheol, in mourning.” And he wept for his son.’ (Gen. 37:34–35) The verb למאן, ‘to refuse’, followed by an infinitive form of נחם, ‘to be comforted’, is a distinctive way to link Gen. 37, Jer. 31:15 and Matt. 2:15–17 (See Doane and Mastnjak 2019, pp. 413–35). |
23 | ‘She will bear a son, and you are to name him Jesus, for he will save his people (σώσει τὸν λαὸν αὐτοῦ) from their sins’ (Matt. 1:21). |
24 | ‘σώσει τὸν λαὸν αὐτοῦ ἀπὸ τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν αὐτῶν’ (Matt. 1:21) is usually interpreted in a religious sense. Carter (2000, pp. 379–401) proposes a convincing political interpretation of this verse. |
25 | Piotrowski (2016, pp. 37–39) suggests that v.23 modifies our interpretation of v.21. The people of Jesus can be seen as those who call him Emmanuel and recognize the presence of God in him. |
26 | The Christological and ecclesiological significance of the attribution of Emmanuel to Jesus seems more important in the narrative framework of the Gospel than the possibility of virgin conception that has generated so many exegetical commentaries. |
27 | The quotation of Mic. 5:1 in Matt. 2:6 is also an implicit criticism of the Jerusalemite leadership with an appeal to a renewed Shepherd-like leadership from Bethlehem. |
28 | Historical research on Herod shows that Matthew’s characterization of this king is in agreement the other textual witnesses about him (see Bourgel 2020). |
29 | Set against the backdrop of first-century Palestine, this narrative could therefore be an implicit criticism of the abuse of Roman imperial power that dominated the region. The complete barbarity of the narrative prompts the reader to seek justice elsewhere, rather than from the negatively portrayed king. |
30 | Obviously, Matthew 1–2 is not a solid base to learn about the attribution of responsibility about Jesus’s crucifixion. However, its story has so many similarities with the Passion that it can be used to reflect upon the attribution of responsibility of Jesus’s death. |
31 | She refers to Alexander’s investigation of trauma narratives following the Holocaust and their impact on Israel-Palestine conflict. |
32 | Quoting Is. 7:14 in Matt. 1:23 can also be interpreted as a way to resist empires endangering Davidic leadership (see Doane 2016, pp. 51–71). |
33 | ‘Chief priests and scribes of the people’ (Matt. 2:4)/‘the chief priests and the elders of the people’ (Matt. 26:3). |
34 | ‘When King Herod heard this, he was frightened, and all Jerusalem with him.’ (Matt. 2:3). |
35 | |
36 | The deportation to Babylon is explicitly mentioned in the genealogy. There are multiple allusions to the Exodus in the story of Jesus’s flight to Egypt. The prophetic quotations echo the fall of the northern and southern kingdoms. |
37 | Dube (2013, pp. 107–22) sees the oppression experienced by Jesus and his followers as connected in the cultural trauma expressed in Mark’s Gospel. ‘The suffering and dispossession experienced by Jesus might have triggered a cultural trauma claim, when realizing that the same Empire that killed Jesus had also disposed them of their land, and just as Jesus had lost friends, their kinship solidarity had also disintegrated. By associating the brutal story of Jesus with their own experiences, it demonstrated for the peasants that losing land is not simply losing material property; instead, it equals gruesome violence that threatens death and the end of a community. The realization that they too might face death due to deprivation and hunger might have triggered a sudden panic, knowing that, like Jesus, their demise was instigated by the same Roman Empire’. |
38 | Park (2013, p. 482) shows the tragic massacre as a form of criticism of the abuse of imperial power: ‘Matthew’s citation of Jer 31.15 in conjunction with Herod’s infanticide would have evoked in the minds of the Jewish Christian audience, who directly or indirectly would have experienced another fall of Jerusalem in 70 CE, a highly complex set of emotions.’. |
39 | Josephus, The Jewish War 5.412; Tacitus, Historiae 5.13. |
40 | Meier (2004, p. 32) proposes that we view the infancy stories in Matthew 2 as a proleptic Passion narrative. The link between the infancy and Passion narratives in Matthew is described in Brown (1993, pp. 174–75, 183). |
41 | Many news articles have linked Matthew 2 and the Syrian refugee crisis. ‘Emily McFarlan Miller, “Jesus the refugee”: Churches connect Christmas story to migrant crisis’, USA Today, December 23 (2017); Joan E. Taylor, ‘Jesus Was a Refugee’, https://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/people-cultures-in-the-bible/jesus-historical-jesus/jesus-was-a-refugee/ (accessed on 28 November 2017); Alice Camille, ‘Was Jesus a refugee?’, U.S. Catholic 82/8 (2019), p. 49. |
42 | For example, Rachel’s refusal of comfort in the face of brutal abuse of power still calls us to resist in new situations of injustice (see Claassens 2009, pp. 193–204; Doane 2017, pp. 1–20). Surprisingly, the image is even used to express feelings about interspecies grief distress such as the treat of extinction of the great blue heron Steven Salido Fischer, “Amid threat of extinction, remember today’s ‘holy innocents’ who couldn’t take flight” NCR 27 December 2022, https://www.ncronline.org/earthbeat/viewpoints/amid-threat-extinction-remember-todays-holy-innocents-who-couldnt-take-flight (accessed on 28 June 2023). |
References
- Alexander, Jeffery C. 2012. Trauma: A Social Theory. Cambridge: Polity. [Google Scholar]
- Alexander, Jeffery C., and Elizabeth B. Breese. 2011. Introduction: On Social Suffering and its Cultural Construction. In Narrating Trauma: On the Impact of Collective Suffering. Edited by Ron Eyerman, Jeffrey C. Alexander and Elizabeth B. Breese. Boulder: Paradigm, pp. xiv–xxii. [Google Scholar]
- Becking, Bob. 1994. ‘A voice was heard in Ramah’: Some remarks on structure and meaning of Jeremiah. 31, 15–17. Biblisches Zeitschrift 38: 229–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bourgel, Jonathan. 2020. Hérode, roi d’Israël? Paris: Cerf. [Google Scholar]
- Bright, John. 1965. Jeremiah: Introduction, Translation, and Notes. Garden City: Doubleday. [Google Scholar]
- Brown, E. Raymond. 1993. The Birth of the Messiah: A Commentary on the Infancy Narratives in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke. New York: Doubleday. [Google Scholar]
- Carr, M. David. 2014. Holy Resilience. The Bible’s Traumatic Origins. New Haven: Yale University Press. [Google Scholar]
- Carter, Warren. 2000. ‘To Save His People from their Sins’ (Mt.1.21): Rome’s Empire and Matthew’s Salvation as Sovereignty. SBL Seminar Papers 39: 379–401. [Google Scholar]
- Carter, Warren. 2001. Matthew and Empire: Initial Explorations. Harrisburg: Trinity Press International. [Google Scholar]
- Charlesworth, H. John. 1987. From Jewish Messianology to Christian Christology: Some Caveats and Perspectives. In Judaisms and Their Messiahs at the Turn of the Christian Era. Edited by Jacob Neusner, William Scott Green and Ernest S. Frerichs. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 225–64. [Google Scholar]
- Claassens, Julianna L. 2009. The Image of the Wailing Woman and the Task of the Feminist Theologian: With Special Attention to the Role of Lament in the Book of Matthew. In Ragbag Theologies: Essays in Honour of Denise Ackermann, A Feminist Theologian of Praxis. Edited by Miranda Pillay, Sarojini Nadar and Clint Le Bruyns. Stellenbosch: Sun Press, pp. 193–204. [Google Scholar]
- Claassens, Julianna L. 2018. From Traumatic to Narrative Memories. The Rhetorical Function of Birth Metaphors in Micha 4–5. Acta Theologica 26: 221–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cohen, Akiva. 2020. Matthew and the Temple. In Matthew within Judaism: Israel and the Nations in the First Gospel. Edited by Anders Runesson and Matthew. D. Gurtner. Atlanta: SBL, pp. 75–101. [Google Scholar]
- Collins, John J. 1995. The Scepter and the Star: Messianism in Light of the Dead Sea Scrolls. New York: Doubleday. [Google Scholar]
- Davies, William David, and Dale C. Allison, Jr. 1988. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Gospel According to Saint Matthew 1–7. Volume 1. Edinburgh: T&T Clark. [Google Scholar]
- Davies, William David, and Dale C. Allison, Jr. 2004. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Gospel According to Saint Matthew. Volume 1. London and New York: T&T Clark International. [Google Scholar]
- Doane, Sébastien. 2016. Résister aux injustices impériales en citant Isaïe: Analyse intertextuelle de Mt.1, 23 et Is 7, 14. Théologiques 24: 51–72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Doane, Sébastien. 2017. Rachel Weeping: Intertextuality as a Means of Transforming the Readers Worldview. Journal of the Bible and its Reception 4: 1–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Doane, Sébastien. 2019. Masculinities of the husbands in Jesus’ Genealogy. Biblical Interpretation 27: 91–106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Doane, Sébastien, and Nathan Mastnjak. 2019. Echoes of Rachel’s Weeping: Intertextuality and Trauma in Jer. 31.15. Biblical Interpretation 27: 413–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dube, Zorodzai. 2013. Jesus’ Death and Resurrection as Cultural Trauma. Neotestamentica 47: 107–22. [Google Scholar]
- Dunn, James. 2003. Jesus Remembered, Christianity in the Making. Grand Rapids: Eerdman. [Google Scholar]
- Frechette, Christopher G., and Elizabeth Boase. 2016. Defining ‘Trauma’ as a Useful Lens for Biblical Interpretation. In Bible through the Lens of Trauma. Edited by Elizabeth Boase and Christopher G. Frechette. Atlanta: SBL, pp. 1–23. [Google Scholar]
- Garber, David G. 2015. Trauma Theory and Biblical Studies. Currents in Biblical Research 14: 24–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Granofsky, Ronald. 1995. The Trauma Novel: Contemporary Symbolic Depictions of Collective Disaster. New York: Lang. [Google Scholar]
- Gundry, Robert H. 1967. The Use of the Old Testament in St Matthew’s Gospel with Special Reference to the Messianic Hope. Leiden: Brill. [Google Scholar]
- Gurtner, David M. 2007. The Torn Veil: Matthew’s Exposition of the Death of Jesus. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 97–137. [Google Scholar]
- Harrington, Daniel J. 1991. The Gospel of Matthew. Collegeville: Liturgical Press. [Google Scholar]
- Holladay, William L., and Paul D. Hanson. 1986. A Commentary on the Book of the Prophet Jeremiah. Volume 2. Minneapolis: Augsburg-Fortress. [Google Scholar]
- Horsley, Richard A. 2014. Jesus and the Politics of Roman Palestine. Colombia: University of South Carolina Press. [Google Scholar]
- Huntzinger, Hervé. 2020. Eusèbe de Césarée et les ruines de Jérusalem. In Les récits de la destruction de Jérusalem (70 ap. J.-C.). Edited by Frédéric Chapot. Turnjout: Brepols, pp. 175–232. [Google Scholar]
- Janzen, David. 2019a. Claimed and Unclaimed Experience: Problematic Readings of Trauma in the Hebrew Bible. Biblical Interpretation 27: 163–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Janzen, David. 2019b. Trauma and the Failure of History: Kings, Lamentations, and the Destruction of Jerusalem. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature. [Google Scholar]
- Jones, Ken. 2011. Jewish Reactions to the Destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70. Leiden: Brill. [Google Scholar]
- Knowles, Michael P. 2006. Scripture, History, Messiah: Scriptural Fulfillment and the Fullness of Time in Mathew’s Gospel. In Hearing the Old Testament in the New Testament. Edited by Stanley E. Porter. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, pp. 59–82. [Google Scholar]
- Lindars, Barnabas. 1979. Rachel Weeping for Her Children—Jeremiah 31.15—22. Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 12: 47–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Luz, Ulrich. 2004. Intertexts in the Gospel of Matthew. Harvard Theological Review 97: 119–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Luz, Ulrich. 2007. Matthew 1–7: A Commentary. Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortres. [Google Scholar]
- Marohl, Matthew J. 2012. Unexpected Life: Reading the Gospel of Matthew. Eugene: Cascade. [Google Scholar]
- Mazurel, J. W. 2004. Citations from the Book of Jeremiah in the New Testament. In Reading the Book of Jeremiah. A Search for Coherence. Edited by Martin Kessler. Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns. [Google Scholar]
- Meier, John Paul. 2004. The Vision of Matthew: Christ, Church, and Morality in the First Gospel. Eugene: Wipf & Stock. [Google Scholar]
- Mello, Anthony. 1999. Évangile Selon Saint Matthieu. Commentaire Midrashique Et Narratif. Paris: Cerf. [Google Scholar]
- Miler, Jean. 1999. Les Citations D’accomplissement dans L’évangile de Matthieu: Quand Dieu se Rend Présent en toute Humanité. Rome: Pontificio Istituto Biblico. [Google Scholar]
- Morgenstern, Matthias. 2020. Réflexion sur l’image et l’histoire du Temple de Jérusalem dans le Midrash Bereshit Rabba. In Les récits de la destruction de Jérusalem (70 ap. J.-C.). Edited by Frédéric Chapot. Turnjout: Brepols, pp. 259–91. [Google Scholar]
- Overman, Andrew J. 1990. Matthew’s Gospel and Formative Judaism: The Social World of the Matthean Community. Minneapolis: Fortress. [Google Scholar]
- Park, Eugene Eung Chun. 2013. Rachel’s Cry for Her Children: Matthew’s Treatment of the Infanticide by Herod. Catholic Biblical Quarterly 75: 473–85. [Google Scholar]
- Philipps, Garry. 2016. Textual Instability and Responsible Reading: A Poststructural Approach to Matthean Intertextuality. In Exploring Intertextuality: Diverse Strategies for the New Testament Use of Texts. Edited by Brisio J. Oropeza and Steve Moyise. Eugene: Cascade, pp. 106–27. [Google Scholar]
- Piotrowski, Nicholas G. 2016. Matthew’s New David at the End of Exile: A Socio-Rhetorical Study of Scriptural Quotations. Leiden: Brill. [Google Scholar]
- Pruszinski, Jolyon G. R. 2023. Trauma & TYPOI: The Fourth Gospel as Warning Not Example. Religions 14: 27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Reinhartz, Adele. 2014. The Destruction of the Jerusalem Temple as a Trauma for Nascent Christianity. In Trauma and Traumatization in Individual and Collective Dimensions: Insights from Biblical Studies and Beyond. Edited by Eve-Marie Becker, Jan Dochhorn and Else K. Holt. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, pp. 275–88. [Google Scholar]
- Repschinski, Boris. 2006. ‘For He Will Save His People From Their Sins’ (Matthew 1.21): A Christology for Christian Jews. Catholic Biblical Quarterly 68: 248–67. [Google Scholar]
- Runesson, Anders, and David M. Gurtner, eds. 2020. The Location of the Matthew-within-Judaism Perspective in Past and Present Research. In Matthew within Judaism: Israel and the Nations in the First Gospel. Gurtner. Atlanta: SBL, pp. 1–25. [Google Scholar]
- Sanders, E. Parish. 1992. Judaism: Practice and Belief, 63 BCE-66 CE. London: SCM Press. [Google Scholar]
- Scarsella, Hilary Jerome. 2018. Trauma and Theology Prospects and Limits in Light of the Cross. In Trauma and Transcendence. Edited by Eric Boynton and Peter Capretto. New York: Fordham University Press, pp. 256–82. [Google Scholar]
- Sim, David C. 1988. The Gospel of Matthew and Christian Judaism: The History and Social Setting of the Matthean Community. Edinburgh: T&T Clark International. [Google Scholar]
- Soares-Prabhu, George M. 1976. The Formula Quotations in the Infancy Narrative of Matthew: An Enquiry into the Tradition History of Mt.1–2. Rome: Biblical Institute Press. [Google Scholar]
- Struckenbruck, Loren T. 2007. Messianic Ideas in the Apocalyptic and Related Literature of Early Judaism. In The Messiah in the Old and New Testaments. Edited by Stanley E. Porter. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, pp. 112–13. [Google Scholar]
- Theissen, Gerd, and Annette Merz. 1998. The Historical Jesus: A Comprehensive Guide. Minneapolis: Fortress. [Google Scholar]
- Thompson, John A. 1980. The Book of Jeremiah. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans. [Google Scholar]
- Trafton, Joseph L. 1994. The Psalms of Solomon in Recent Research. Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha 12: 3–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Willitts, Joel. 2012. Matthew and Psalms of Solomon’s Messianism: A Comparative Study in First-Century Messianology. Bulletin for Biblical Research 22: 27–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wright, Nicholas Thomas. 1992. The New Testament and the People of God. Vol. 1: Of Christian Origins and the Question of God. Minneapolis: Fortress. [Google Scholar]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2024 by the author. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Doane, S. Jesus’s Origins (Matthew 1–2) as Cultural Trauma. Religions 2024, 15, 956. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel15080956
Doane S. Jesus’s Origins (Matthew 1–2) as Cultural Trauma. Religions. 2024; 15(8):956. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel15080956
Chicago/Turabian StyleDoane, Sébastien. 2024. "Jesus’s Origins (Matthew 1–2) as Cultural Trauma" Religions 15, no. 8: 956. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel15080956