In my opinion, whether you believe in the resurrection of Jesus boils down to one thing: do you believe resurrections can happen? If you do not believe resurrections can happen, then of course you will find some alternative explanation for what happened that Sunday so long ago. But if you do believe resurrections can happen, then I believe you will conclude that Jesus rose from the dead.
There are two reasons. The first is the fact that no one seems to have been able to account for the body of Jesus from Sunday on. The second is the multiple eyewitness accounts to having seen him alive after his death.
1. I believe that even an objective atheist should conclude that individuals like Peter, James, Paul, and John were convinced they had seen Jesus alive after he was dead. Paul knew these individuals (e.g., Gal. 2) and passed on their common testimony to Jesus' resurrection (e.g., 1 Cor. 15). Paul himself gives clear testimony to seeing Jesus alive as well (e.g., 1 Cor. 9).
We can debate what they thought they saw. But we have every reason to believe Paul's account that multiple people on multiple occasions were convinced that they had seen Jesus alive after he had died. And they were convinced enough to undergo quite a bit of hardship and ultimately to face death. If they had any significant doubt, why would they have persisted?
And surely either the Corinthians or the Jerusalem church would have jumped on the opportunity to correct Paul if his story about Peter, James, and himself was not commonly accepted. His multiple writings leave no trace of such counter rhetoric.
Some point to difficulties in reconciling the resurrection accounts as a reason to doubt them. But consider, if oral traditions go in various directions, it points to some big splash at their root. In other words, we are not talking about a single story that changed over time. We are talking about waves that went out in multiple directions.
And what was the splash likely to be? What is the common ground behind the variations? It is sightings of Jesus alive after he died.
2. Certainly the canonical gospels indicate that a group of women were unable to find the body of Jesus on Sunday. I don't suppose you would invent women as the ones to find the empty tomb, if the story were made up. It would be much more believable to have some man, maybe even someone important find it empty. The specifics of the names point most likely to people who continued to talk about the story of the empty tomb and were remembered for telling the story for decades.
The idea of a Joseph of Arimathea--an otherwise completely unknown character--taking the body of Jesus and putting it in a tomb also is exactly the sort of oral tradition we would expect. Matthew further tells of a rumor that the disciples had stolen the body. Notice what is being disputed--not that there is no body, only why there was no body. In other words, we have evidence that at least some of those who disputed the resurrection accepted that the tomb where Jesus had been laid was later found empty.
So we have an empty tomb and a number of eyewitnesses. A final thing to mention is that it does not seem likely at all to me that the disciples were expecting Jesus to rise from the dead. If Peter denies Jesus, if Judas betrays Jesus--these are not the sorts of things that happen in a climate of expectation. Peter was thus firmly convinced over and against his likely expectations.
So if you believe resurrections can happen, you should certainly believe in this one.
May all have a blessed day celebrating Christ's victory over death!