What is the point of just listing "all aberrant views ever held through 
history" about a certain topic if you then do not say what you believe
yourself and why? I appreciate that you "only listed" and have not said 
you believe this. I would be interested to hear what you really believe
and why. But why do you try to make "the whole topic" very doubtful by 
just listing many opinions on it? Don't you think I can make the issue 
"how the Qur'an came into being" very doubtful if I just list all the 
strange theories that people have brought forward over the centuries -
whether I myself think these speculations are valid or laughable? Without
evaluation of the theories and then saying what I think about it, I hold
this to be purposeful deception, trying to make the impression on people

"because there are so many views (no matter how solid or ridiculous) 
 this shows how little we know and how uncertain it really is".

Because many people have very different and not so favorable opinions
about Muhammad and the Qur'an, would you therefore agree that it is a 
very doubtful and uncertain matter? 

In fact any important event in history which claims consequences for 
today will invariably draw much attention of many people and the more
attention it gets the more theories will spring up on it. Does it mean 
the more important an event is  the less sure we can be about it?

I am interested to know what YOU believe. And then we can debate on
whether your belief is sound or not. I am not really interested to 
debate speculations you don't believe either.


Now, in order to illustrate this point a bit clearer, let's assume 
that you (rightly) believe that 2 + 2 = 4. But for whatever reason, 
I am strongly opposed to this view. Now, I haven't decided 
yet what the addition of 2 and 2 should be, but that is 
rather unsubstantial. I bring you a long list of people who
have all kinds of ideas of how to promote that 2 + 2 = 5, 
others strongly believe 2 + 2 = 18, while some lonely 
defender wrote many books on why 2 + 2 = -1. Would you say
that a long list of people believing contradictory things is
an impressive case against your belief that "2 + 2 = 4" ?
No, even if you have 200 people who believe something else
but contradict each other, all these many people have no
stronger case than any one of them just for himself. 

Because their theories contradict each other, AT MOST one 
of could be right. And therefore all of them together are no 
stronger than any one of them alone. Alternative theory A
can either support or contradict alternative theory B.

In fact, rather than supporting each other, they weaken each
other's case because they show that all these efforts have
only proven that it is no easy thing to disprove "2 + 2 = 4"
and nobody has had any convincing arguments yet. THAT is
the reason so many of these theories exist. 

Conclusion: Although I don't know why anybody should have 
anything against "2 + 2 = 4", I know a lot of people who have 
much motivation to be against the "death and resurrection of
Jesus". But because it is such a clear case, it is impossible
to come up with any intelligable theory against it. THAT is
the reason for all these many theories and the huge number
of contradictory speculations testifies to the strength of 
the Biblical eyewitness accounts.

Not just atheists are exceedingly bothered by the 
resurrection of Jesus. That is also testified to by 
the several contradictory speculations Muslims have come 
up with on top of the ones promoted by the unbelievers. 

Although the historical event of cross and resurrection is 
the CENTER of the Christian faith, the originator of the 
Qur'an [whoever it may be] has "seemingly" not bothered to 
give any coherent explanation on this topic, but was content 
to just declare: "It was an illusion and didn't really happen."

It was important enough to be against it, but not important
enough to explain what really happened. And in the next
sentence it is then said: 
"If you doubt you are of those who have no knowledge."

EXACTLY: Because I do not have the knowledge, therefore 
I doubt. Or rather: Because I do have knowledge based 
on strong evidence I am not going to just accept a 
claim to the contrary without any backup evidence, but
any such claim will induce strong doubt in me.

Do Muslims really want to say that that I should believe 
AGAINST evidence and reason?

Overview on topic of the crucifixion.
Answering Islam home page.