I was wondering what people would suggest as an answer?
@Branden, I think given you that you aren't a theist, then you are right in being an agnostic about the resurrection. Although I imagine that plenty of people would disagree. I accept the cumulative case for theism from Natural Theology. Given I find the historical case for the resurrection plausible, maybe I should hold the belief that it happened more strongly?
Thanks for the reply Brendan, I guess I can imagine God of Natural Theology (especially given the Moral and Ontological arguments) putting a "Rescue Plan" in place like sending Jesus to save us. I find the alternative theories relating to the events to be very lacking. However I guess I want just a bit more evidence. William Lane Craig at some point suggested that if God erect a huge cross in the sky with the words "Jesus Saves" then belief in the resurrection would be coercive (I may have got this story a bit muddled). However I think the example he uses is a bit too extreme. How about just a bit more evidence? A few more sources? A visiting Roman Historian who "just happened" to be in the right place at the right time? I don't know. But then I guess, how much evidence would be enough without being coercive.
As a matter of interest, do you want Christianity to be true?
However my question is related to the Opening Post. What do you say to someone who says? Ok, swoon hypothesis, wrong tomb, conspiracy, hallucination, secret twin brother, etc don't explain things very well but why can't we just say that we don't know what happened? Some combination of events occured and we just don't know.