I put together a collection of resources on issues related to Easter in 2009. Last year, I added to it.
Since that post, we've written an ebook, The Infidel Delusion, that covers a lot of subjects relevant to Jesus' resurrection. Paul Manata wrote a post on whether the early Christians were persecuted for their belief in the resurrection. I wrote a post about Acts 26:19, the nature of Jesus' resurrection appearance to Paul, and whether Paul was the only New Testament author who claimed to see the risen Jesus. I also wrote a review of Michael Licona's recent book on the resurrection. I wrote some posts that quote some of Licona's material on several issues, including problems with the hallucination theory, the nature of the resurrection body in 1 Corinthians 15:44, the meaning of 1 Corinthians 15:50, scholarship on the empty tomb, scholarship on the authorship of Acts, and scholarly bias. Steve Hays and I participated in a discussion with a skeptic about whether the regularities of nature are as problematic for supernatural theories as they are for natural theories. In other words, if the evidence suggests that people don't naturally rise from the dead and that they don't naturally have the sort of hallucinations skeptics often attribute to the resurrection witnesses, then are those facts equally significant to the respective theories in question? Patrick Chan linked to an article about Bayes' Theorem and the resurrection and another one responding to Richard Carrier on a related subject. I wrote about the ordinariness of the resurrected Jesus in the gospels as evidence for the gospel accounts. Here's a post in which I linked to an interview with Gary Habermas on the Shroud of Turin. And here's a post I wrote about evidence for early Jewish acknowledgment of the empty tomb.
I recently put together a topical index for this blog that links to some of our posts on particular topics. Some of those topics have a lot of relevance to Jesus' resurrection, such as Biblical authorship and evidence for modern miracles.