Dominus Deus tuus ignis consumens est
Its good to hear from one who has been both Muslim and Christian. I think where it matters most is the question about the reliability of the Gospel and Quranic accounts which many followers of these respective books regard as being literally true and the unerring word of God. OTOH I agree living in a manner that is pleasing to God is far more important.
Curiously, the Qur'anic account of Jesus has nothing to say about him being baptised by John (it doesn't have a concept of baptismal theology to begin with, so I guess that's understandable), makes no mention of his causing a disturbance in the temple and under traditional Islamic exegesis claims the crucifixion did not take place.
In other words, the three aspects of his life that secular scholars consider practically incontestable, are not Qur'anic.
Instead, the Qur'an discusses at length his miraculous birth (which a number scholars regard as a pious legend from the later first century, given that Paul and Mark seem to be unaware of it, despite its importance to subsequent Christians and Muslims), his wonder-working miracles and cures, his reputed foreknowledge or psychic prescience (also alluded to in the four gospels), his ascension and Second Coming.
The Jesus of the Qur'an, Isa in Arabic, is arguably alien to the historical Jesus - certainly more so even than the latest gospel to be written, John (which has a very persuasive passion narrative and description of signs that scholars consider to be derived from sources much earlier than the actual gospel, itself written near the end of the first century). The Qur'an is so distantly removed from the events and clearly indebted to sixth century Christian texts like the Syriac Infancy Gospel, that I think it is better to view Muhammad as using fables - much like Jesus did with his parables - to enunciate spiritual truths, rather than preaching about anything even close to history.