A heated scholarly dispute erupted in 1965 when Rabbi Jacob Neusner's review of "Portrait of a People" sparked fierce objections from both its publisher and author. The three-volume work by Charles Raddock became the centerpiece of a detailed point-by-point debate published in Conservative Judaism, revealing deep divisions over Jewish historical interpretation. The exchange exposed fundamental disagreements about factual matters—from basic details like the work's true length (979 versus 800 pages) to substantive historical questions about figures such as Rabban Yohanan ben Zakkai and the Hillel-Jesus relationship in early Christian thought. Judaica Press and Raddock systematically challenged Neusner's critique, particularly his assessment of the author's treatment of modern Jewish philosophical thought and self-described "partisanship" toward traditional Judaism. Neusner's subsequent response defended his original criticisms, especially regarding his expertise on Rabban Yohanan ben Zakkai and Christian theological perspectives. This correspondence offers a window into the contentious nature of Jewish historical scholarship and peer review within mid-20th century Conservative Jewish intellectual circles.