In A History of Judaism, the scholar Martin Goodman attempts to compress his vast subject into a single volume. He does so with no small degree of success, writes Rivkah Fishman-Duker, who sees the book as a bold deviation from academics’ current allergy to writing broad, useful surveys of the subjects they study:

[U]niversity professors increasingly focus [in their teaching and writing] on specific issues, even minutiae, rather than dealing with more general questions; thus we seem to know more and more about less and less. [Therefore] Martin Goodman’s A History of Judaism has appeared not a moment too soon and represents a welcome antidote to trends dating back several decades. In this age of ultra-specialization and deconstruction, . . . it is an act of extraordinary intellectual courage that Goodman . . . has written A History of Judaism from its origins to the present.

The volume offers a comprehensive overview of the development of Jewish religion and thought without imposing either a tenuous uniformity or a disorientating fragmentation. This balanced approach avoids the pitfalls of . . . recent studies [presenting] a random collection of disparate movements, ideas, and events.

Goodman’s definition of his subject as a history of Judaism rather than a history of the Jews facilitates his approach. Since Judaism was and is created by Jews, the author includes historical events and trends that are essential as background for the development of the variety of Jewish movements, ideas, principles, and practices. Therefore, the reader benefits from a chronological and geographical framework that accompanies the presentation and analysis of the texts and their authors during a given time period.

The significance of integrating dates and facts, while interpreting and evaluating the content of the sources cannot be overemphasized. . . . Goodman’s solid treatment dispels fuzzy thinking and misleading ideas, and he deserves accolades for honest scholarship and cogent arguments based on a wide selection of sources.

For some time, opponents of U.S support for Israel have been urging the White House to end the war in Gaza, or simply calling for a ceasefire. Douglas Feith and Lewis Libby consider what such a result would actually entail:

Ending the war immediately would allow Hamas to survive and retain military and governing power. Leaving it in the area containing the Sinai-Gaza smuggling routes would ensure that Hamas can rearm. This is why Hamas leaders now plead for a ceasefire. A ceasefire will provide some relief for Gazans today, but a prolonged ceasefire will preserve Hamas’s bloody oppression of Gaza and make future wars with Israel inevitable.

For most Gazans, even when there is no hot war, Hamas’s dictatorship is a nightmarish tyranny. Hamas rule features the torture and murder of regime opponents, official corruption, extremist indoctrination of children, and misery for the population in general. Hamas diverts foreign aid and other resources from proper uses; instead of improving life for the mass of the people, it uses the funds to fight against Palestinians and Israelis.

Moreover, a Hamas-affiliated website warned Gazans last month against cooperating with Israel in securing and delivering the truckloads of aid flowing into the Strip. It promised to deal with those who do with “an iron fist.” In other words, if Hamas remains in power, it will begin torturing, imprisoning, or murdering those it deems collaborators the moment the war ends. Thereafter, Hamas will begin planning its next attack on Israel:

Hamas’s goals are to overshadow the Palestinian Authority, win control of the West Bank, and establish Hamas leadership over the Palestinian revolution. Hamas’s ultimate aim is to spark a regional war to obliterate Israel and, as Hamas leaders steadfastly maintain, fulfill a Quranic vision of killing all Jews.

Hamas planned for corpses of Palestinian babies and mothers to serve as the mainspring of its October 7 war plan. Hamas calculated it could survive a war against a superior Israeli force and energize enemies of Israel around the world. The key to both aims was arranging for grievous Palestinian civilian losses. . . . That element of Hamas’s war plan is working impressively.