convince me.
But you've said several times that you don't necessary need evidence for what you believe and by extention a lack of evidence will not stop you from believing what you already believe. I wonder what it is your looking for really.
Anyway, I am an ex-sunni, but I had a much larger issue with the Quran when I was questioning, at the beginning. The biggest 'red flags' for me came from the Quran and I concentrated on it more because I knew it's contents couldn't be explained away as 'perhaps not authentic' or 'oh but historical context'. [Btw, I'm just giving you my perspective, because I can tell by your responses you are not looking to get 'convinced' lol]
Essentially, I started to look at the Quran as a religious text. Not my religious text. And not thee religious text. Just like one of the many many religious text that exist in the world. I wanted to see whether it held up if I tried to look at it unbiasedly, or as unbiasedly as I could. I looked at it's claims and it's contents. The number one thing that was most difficult for me in the exercise was that I had to remind myself to not think of the Prophet as the messenger of Allah, but as a man who was claiming to be talking to God, and revealing his words.
So here I had this book. A book 1400+ years old and the man who wrote the book (/or rather spoke it) says that the book is from the creator, who created all things and that he has sent this message through him to the whole world, for all time and for all people.
When I was reading, there were a few things that jumped out at me in ways that they hadn't previously. The issues of how women are treated (two women as witnesses etc), the issues of slavery etc You have probably heard all of them. I found I wasnt able to excuse them and when I applied the litmus test I had devised at the beginning, it started to look unfavourable in my eyes.
However, there were a few things in particular that caught my attention. The first one being that there were verses in the Quran that dealt exclusively with Muhammad, his life, his wives and his domestic issues. I found it curious that these should be left in the Final Message to mankind. And when I reminded myself to think of Muhammad as just a man, who was making claims about the text, and that he was the only person to be 'revealing the words of God', it all started to look suspicious really. I realised that if this wasn't my prophet, I would regard him as awfully suspicious. Why is the creator of the world, arbitrating his domestic issues in The Final Message for all the world? It just doesn't make sense. If this wasn't my religion, I realised I would have dismissed him as a man who was using his reputation 'as the messenger from God' to get people to behave in ways that were favourable to him, or to give him permission to do what he wanted.
The second thing that got to me, was the Character of Allah. I didn't find him merciful, or particularly fair. (by the end I regarded the god of this book as despotic and egotistical, I kept thinking of dictators honestly - though at this point, I still believed, lol right). Anyway, there was one aspect that I couldn't understand and I still don't. There was something that I didn't think of at all before I started the exercise, and it was this - Why does Allah favour the 'Children of Israel' above all other peoples? This is mentioned several times iirc. Why did Allah give preference to them? What type of creator is this, who collectively punishes one community (children and all), and then gives another group preference 'above all others' even though they would eventually anger him, and he had to have known that as he knows everything.
There were a multitude of other things that made me go 'huh?' but I've written too much already. Anyway, I am one of the minority here in that I would probably regard myself as a believer in God, though for all intents and purposes I could easily be described as agnostic. Ultimately, I realised the God of the Quran was not up to the standard of the God I believed in in my mind, if that makes sense.