In this week's featured article, apologist Peter Kreeft presents a compelling case for the historical resurrection of Jesus Christ.
Kreeft begins his case by presupposing only two things, both of which are empirical: 1) The existence of the New Testament texts as we have them 2) and the existence (but not necessarily the truth) of the Christian religion as we find it today.
"We believe Christ's resurrection can be proved with at least as much certainty as any universally believed and well-documented event in ancient history. To prove this, we do not need to presuppose anything controversial (e.g. that miracles happen). But the skeptic must also not presuppose anything (e.g. that they do not). We do not need to presuppose that the New Testament is infallible, or divinely inspired or even true. We do not need to presuppose that there really was an empty tomb or post-resurrection appearances, as recorded...The question is this: Which theory about what really happened in Jerusalem on that first Easter Sunday can account for the data? There are five possible theories: Christianity, hallucination, myth, conspiracy and swoon." 
Click here to read Dr. Kreeft's article, Evidence for the Resurrection of Christ, in it's entirety.
I pray you are encouraged by this work.
Courage and Godspeed,
Chad A. Gross
1. Peter Kreeft, Evidence for the Resurrection of Christ, http://www.peterkreeft.com/topics-more/resurrection-evidence.htm, 1994.