Resurrection is  the preeminent topic of Easter. Worldwide, Christianity rests its case on it. Hundreds of millions of people of every race believe in it. The Church celebrates it with special events, often accompanied by extravagant musical performances. Television devotes many hours during many days to broadcast landmark films that recount the life and time of Jesus of Nazareth. From every pulpit, theologians proclaim the Good News — “He lives.” No subject has undergone more scrutiny than the Resurrection. Centuries of scholarly research have translated and dissected every aspect of Biblical documentation. And yet no event has been more enthusiastically repudiated as a fabrication by fools for fools. Even among devoted Christians, you hear subjective discussions about the “literal” interpretation of the Resurrection. Even among Christians who want to believe, you hear that uneasy equivocation, the expressions of doubt — “no one knows what the truth is, no one can know, but we have to have faith.” Anyway, they say, even if the Resurrection didn’t happen precisely as The Bible says, the teachings of Christ and the works of Christ’s missionaries have transformed the world for the better, spreading the gospel of brotherly love and salvation. Isn’t that true? This work can’t be disputed. Still, a growing secular society views Christianity as an absurd illusion. In fact, for millions, believing in a God is nonsensical, much less believing in the deification of Christ. However, few scholars, atheist or otherwise, doubt that Christ was an historical figure. Unfortunately, there is no conclusive evidence — no CCTV, no DNA, no fingerprints, no soil samples — that prove He left His final resting place to reunite with His followers. All you have are written accounts, unsubstantiated by legal authorities of the day. You can understand why human beings want to believe. Christianity offers salvation — eternal life — a reason to have hope in a spiritual realm — a reason to live a life worthy of deliverance. But people of sound and reasonable minds still must ask — why should anyone believe the unbelievable? If God gave you brainpower to think reasonably, how can you deny your intellectual endowment, your rational thought? Exactly. You can’t. You must approach the Resurrection with common sense, much like a cop approaches a crime scene. As an investigator, you must rely on the evidence of human behavior — on motives, on self interest. Begin with what you know. The Resurrection survived well past the event itself. Not just for a few days, weeks or months. But for millennia. Ask why. If the event never happened, what possible motive would perpetuate a lie? Reasonably speaking, there had to be a premeditated conspiratorial hoax on the part of a relatively small number of ordinary people — who, by the way, suffered needlessly — toward what end? These people had to convene in a back room somewhere and say: “Let’s do this. Let’s pull off the hoax of the century.” As an investigator, you then must ask, “Why?” Who was the hoax directed against? What was the motive? Was there material reward? Fame? Wealth? World domination? What did the disciples have to gain, except certain death? They weren’t trying to win an election. There was no powerful Catholic Church to fund a political army. No, somebody — Matthew, Mark, Luke — dreamed up this idea — let’s steal His body and pretend He’s still alive — that would be neat — and maybe we can become heroes and get interviews on CNN — and even negotiate a book deal. As an investigator, this is what you know: Jesus lived and was crucified. Biblical literature records his Resurrection. It is reasonable to conclude that the people of His day — His disciples — were ordinary people with ordinary lives and ordinary hopes and dreams — just as pragmatic as you are today. What they accomplished at the time they were living was to die agonizing deaths. For what? As an investigator, you must face the essential question and demand a credible answer: Was the Resurrection a lie — and if so, why was the lie told? You can immerse yourself in scholarly tomes and search for answers. But this isn’t a question reserved for religious hierarchies. This is a question reserved for you alone — individually. It comes down to motive, after all. Forget everything else. The Resurrection is more reasonable to believe than to disbelieve — because not to believe doesn’t square with simple, uncontaminated reason. This issue isn’t a matter of emotion, religious dogma or prejudice — it’s matter of simple empirical thought.