What does this mean to you?

[Sojourn]

Salam Sojourn

Wa salaam Ali,

The Gospel of Barnabas was accepted as a Canonical Gospel in the Churches of Alexandria till 325 A.D.

If Barnabas did write a Gospel that was read, it's not the same gospel you are referring to. Like I said, the "gospel" you refer to is a recognized forgery.

Iranaeus (130-200) wrote in support of pure monotheism.

Irenaeus explicitly calls Jesus God:

"Jesus Christ our Lord and God and Savior and King, in accord with the approval of the invisible Father, every knee shall bend of those in heaven and on earth and under the earth
Against Heresies 1:10:1

He had quoted extensively from the Gospel of Barnabas in support of his views. How can he quote a gospel which did not exist at his time?

You're assuming the late 16th century forgery is what the Early Church Father's quoted.

I'm telling you that to show that opinions of historians regarding Jesus' crucifixion vary from Jesus being crucified to Jesus not even existing so there is no point of crucifixion.

An opposing opinion can always be found. Muhammad Sven Kalisch is a Muslim convert and professor of Islamic Theology who, based off his research, believes Muhammad probably never existed.

Constantin-François Volney
Charles François Dupuis
George Albert Wells

The first two lived during the French revolution. George Albert Wells initially believed Jesus was pure myth, but in his later years accepted that there is a historical basis for the existence of Jesus.

Since the opinion vary so much, why should we believe some historians if they say that Jesus was crucified.

As mentioned above opinions vary about Muhammad's existence, but even I can say it's more probable and reasonable to say that he did exist. I think it's the same with the crucifixion. I see all the reason to accept the historical reality that Jesus suffered and died via crucifixion, but I see no reason to doubt it. Early Christians, Jews, and Romans all accepted that he was crucified, so why should I doubt it?

Furthermore, Quran explains why many historians think that Jesus was crucified.

004.157 That they said (in boast), "We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah";- but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them, and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge, but only conjecture to follow, for of a surety they killed him not:-

Notice the aya is directed to Jews who mockingly said they killed Jesus. Muhammad retorted that he was not killed, but they were fooled into thinking they killed him. I don't think Muhammad understood the significance or purpose of the crucifixion, so to him it was just a barbaric death, and how could Allah permit a prophet to die such a fate?