3. The Resurrection shaped hole in history
The life, death and resurrection of Jesus can be examined as an historical proposition. You don't need to be a Christian or think God helped with the Bible in order to examine its historical propositions. There is historical evidence from within the Bible but also from outside sources, including archaeology.
Further, we can take a minimalist approach to the historical evidence for the resurrection. This just uses data that is agreed upon by a diversity of historical scholars, whether sympathetic to Christianity, indifferent to it or opposed to it. Even many historians who are quite opposed to Christianity see solid evidence for certain parts of Jesus' life as recorded in the Bible.
Let's look at some of the evidence that the vast majority of Biblical scholars agree on. It includes 1 Corinthians, an undisputed Pauline Epistle. Chapter 15:1-8 recounts a tradition that predates the already early date of the letter itself. First Corinthians is dated to 53-57AD. This is quite early but the creed Paul quotes is dated back even earlier, to within a few years of Jesus death in 33-35AD. That is extremely early and almost unique in ancient history.
For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Peter, and then to the Twelve. After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep. Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles, and last of all he appeared to me also, as to one abnormally born. 1 Corinthians 15:3-8
We can follow the conclusion of the vast majority of scholars that from the earliest times the disciples and Paul claim to have witnessed Jesus back from the dead. The people listed as witnesses include groups (500 hundred at one time) and unbelievers such as Paul and James.
What you do with that evidence is where scholars part company. People who start with the notion that dead people can't rise because other dead people haven't risen, conclude that the witnesses were mistaken. Perhaps, it is said, they had mass hallucinations. The problem that Christian scholars observe about that unsubstantiated hypothesis is that hallucinations are private experiences. One person can't transfer the contents of their particular hallucination to another person. A resurrection may stretch credibility. But the imagined alternatives to the plain historical evidence also stretch credibility.
The historical reports of eyewitness sightings are not the only thing that needs to be explained away. The dramatic turn around by people opposed to Jesus needs explanation. Jesus' brother, James was not a follower. The Apostle Paul's conversion story is again something most historical scholars see as authentic, whether those scholars are Christian or opposed to Christianity. The sincerity of Paul's conversion is something no-one doubts. A genuine resurrection appearance to Paul fits perfectly with the 180 degree turn around that took him from persecutor of Christianity to it's chief promoter.
The rapid spread of Christianity in monotheistic Judaism is best accounted for by the hypothesis that Jesus did rise from the dead. Other explanations don't account for the evidences of Christianity spreading so rapidly in the early days when it could most easily be discredited.
Books:
The Resurrection of the Son of God by N.T. Wright.
The Resurrection of Jesus by Michael Licona.
The Jesus Inquest by Charles Foster.
The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus by Habermas and Licona.