Location, Location, Location:
This won't be a lengthy entry, but I thought it was worth throwing into the mix before proceeding. One of the arguments you'll run in to is based on the length of time that passed between the death of Jesus and the writing of the New Testament. Let me start by saying that this isn't a bad point. It's a legitimate concern to the non-believer. The problem is that they don't often have the facts. Most of the time frames you'll hear from them are greatly exaggerated, but that isn't their fault, it's ours. We aren't able to counter these arguments with accuracy and those that can often leave off important factors. First off you need to know the actual time frames in which the New Testament accounts were roughly written. Matthew, Mark and Luke were all written within about 50 years of the crucifixion, Paul's letters within 20 years. 1 Corinthians 15: 3-7 is Paul's deliverance of the creed of the early church to the people in Corinth and it spells out the very core of Christianity. This creed includes eyewitnesses and testimony. It has been dated by scholars to have been written as early as 2 years after Jesus was killed.
It's important to provide the skeptic with time frames, but the location is the real qualifier in my opinion. How could Christianity take root in the very city where Jesus died and rose again if the information were false? If the disciples were lying or had false information then wouldn't they take it elsewhere? If I wanted to falsely present the winner of the last BCS national championship then I'd travel to Canada or Bangladesh to convince people that Notre Dame handily beat Alabama. I certainly wouldn't open up shop in Tuscaloosa. If the disciples were wrong or lying then the movement would have ended as quickly as it began. Christianity would have died along with Jesus in Jerusalem.
In his book New Testament Documents: Are They Reliable?, Bible scholar F.F. Bruce wrote: "If there was any tendency by the disciples to depart from material facts in any way, the possible presence of hostile witnesses in the audience would serve as a corrective." This is a great observation to say the least. Scripture also records that the disciples appealed to the common knowledge of Jesus held by their audience. In Acts, chapter 2, Peter says "You know what He did, you know who He was and you know He rose from the dead. You are all eyewitnesses!" (paraphrasing there of course) There sat over 3,000 people that could have stoned him or at least walked out. Here we have a crucial moment and a real test of the historical account of the resurrection. These were people that could have possibly witnessed the crucifixion, seen the resurrected Jesus or know of people that saw one or both events. Their reaction, given their location, was monumental. Their response was "He's right, we've killed the Messiah. What do we do now?" (again, your ESV is going to be a little different) Acts 2:41 says that "there were added that day about three thousand souls." Clearly the people of Jerusalem realized that Christ was resurrected. So why do people in our culture, 3,600 miles away and 2,100 years later, have a problem with it? We would have to steer away from apologetics and into a far more theological discussion for me to answer that, but our response is simply to share this information and hope that the Holy Spirit can open their eyes as ours were opened.
The simple fact that Christianity began in the very city where Christ was executed would be nearly impossible if there were no resurrection. Someone would have stood up and said "Wait, he's buried right over there beside Billy's tomb, come on, I'll show you." Or maybe "Jesus never died, he lives in a tent over by my cousin." Mentioning location along with accurate time frames on the writing of the New Testament should help overcome some of the skepticism that the non-believer wrestles with concerning the authenticity of the books.
Going Forward:
I will continue to do my best to provide information that validates the historical account of the resurrection and I hope to do so before we celebrate the event as believers. Given that this is the single most important event in the history of mankind, it might take a little while, so hang in there. There are several different angles from which to approach this topic, and I'd like to get to all of them. I hope that this information can strengthen your faith by knowing that the facts are on your side. Remember that this holiday is also a reason for the secular world to throw a few weak sucker punches at our worldview. I'm already waiting with childlike anticipation for all of the Discovery Channel and History Channel shows that offer alternative explanations on the resurrection. I live for poorly assembled theories by the usual cast of "scholars" that come out of the woodwork once a year to offer their opinion, disguised as research, all in the name of selling a few books that otherwise wouldn't find shelf space in a Dollar General. Hopefully some of this information will arm you to protect your family from this barrage of ignorance.
More than that, this is also to help you reach out to the lost as we celebrate. A religious holiday always opens doors to conversation with non-believers, so look for opportunities. Find a way to share the reasons you celebrate Easter with your skeptical friends to get the ball rolling. Once you open those doors, it's not always best to share why Christianity is "right." Sometimes it's just best to show them that, unlike any other religion, Christianity is testable. Show them that your faith has evidence that you can bring to the table and let them test it to determine it's accuracy. Once they see that Christianity is an intelligent and intellectually sound way to seek the truth, and not just a leap of blind faith, then they will likely be more receptive to the Gospel.