Need Help: Paper on Uzair as Rabbi Eliezer

Hey Everyone,

As some of you know, I am writing a paper that challenges the notion that the Quran is confused when it says the Jews claim Ezra is the Son of God in Quran 9:30-31.

I have written the abstract, and have an outline of the paper / main arguments - but before we get into that I thought I would share the abstract with you.

I'm particularly looking for papers (particularly ones that you can send to me) that relate to the topic I am discussing / would bolster my arguments or challenge them. Further, if you have any other references (from the Mishnah or Quran in particular) that you think I missed that would also be appreciated.

Most importantly, if you think I am going down the wrong track, have poor logic, or want to contribute in the writing / editing process, please do let me know.

I'm not a professional academic, so I know my abilities / knowledge of the field is built on interest, not expertise - so I'd appreciate the assistance.

Abstract:

Quran 9:30’s claim that ostensibly monotheistic Jews call ʿUzayr the “Son of God” confounds historians. This study resolves the anomaly by recontextualizing ‘sonship’ within the Qur’an’s hermeneutics and identifying ‘Uzayr’ as a polemical deformation of Rabbi Eliezer ben Hyrcanus (Zellentin and Sidky).

The Qur’an reframes this ‘sonship’ within the functional category of ‘taking lords’ (shurakāʾ, 9:31) a charge of shirk: ceding to human authorities God’s exclusive legislative right (42:21). The verse diagnoses two parallel forms of shirk: the Church commits ontological shirk by deifying Jesus, while the Rabbinate commits legislative shirk by vesting binding authority in its sages.

The pre-Quranic Mishnah formalized this rabbinic codification: it equates the sage’s rulings to Heaven’s (Avot 4:12), subordinates prophecy to court (Sanhedrin 11:5), and establishes self-validating institutional authority (Rosh Hashanah 2:9). In contrast, the Qur’an’s counter-model appears in al-Fātiḥah (1:5–7), directing believers to seek “the straight path” from God alone, rejecting all human institutional claims to define “the way” (halakhah). Synthesizing this evidence with key critiques in Al-Māʾidah (5:44, 116–117) and Al-Baqarah (2:42, 79, 140), this analysis reframes Quran 9:30–31 as the Qur’an’s precise intervention against the human arrogation of divine sovereignty.