These were randomly chosen from a Google search:

(1) “We have clear evidence that Christians tampered with the text of the Gospels to make them better evidence for the Resurrection. How much tampering went on that we don’t have evidence of?” — Steven Carr

(2) “Christians point to Jesus’ resurrection as one of the things which distinguishes Christianity from all other religions. After all, the founders of other religions (like Muhammad and Buddha) are all dead; Jesus conquered death. Or did he? For something so important and central to the message, theology, and very nature of Christianity, it’s curious that the gospel authors would all have such radically different stories about what happened.” — Austin Cline

(3) “Christians pay little attention to the historical record surrounding this supposedly miraculous event. Now let’s be clear on what they believe: Jesus was crucified and was dead as a doornail on Good Friday. He remained dead on Holy Saturday and presumably started to rot as he lay in his tomb.

“He then rose from the dead sometime on Easter Sunday. … [I]t appears that the myth of Jesus’ resurrection evolved many decades after the supposed event.” — The Atheist Missionary

(4) “Believers and skeptics agree: the Christian faith depends on the Resurrection. Paul wrote that ‘if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile …’ Or as agnostic T. H. Huxley asked, ‘If it is not historically true that such and such things happened in Palestine [so long ago], what becomes of Christianity?’ The Resurrection is the central event of Christianity, on which the whole religion hangs.

“… The simple fact is that basic Christianity – what C. S. Lewis called Mere Christianity – depends on an astounding number of outlandish, often magical claims for which we do not – in some cases, cannot – have good evidence. This was not a problem when the religion began, when people had no need for evidence. But the modern Christian apologist – having grown up with a respect for evidence and reason but also a committed faith in the unprovable claims of Christianity – finds himself in quite a bind. He must always hope that a tiny shred of ancient, fragmentary evidence can verify just one claim of Christianity, and thereby verify all the others.” — Luke Muehlhauser

(5) “Asking me to believe in supernatural miracles is one level of ridiculousness. But to say that people experienced and saw the things that Matthew claims they saw, and that these people were so monumentally unimpressed — to the point of completely ignoring it — suggests that, perhaps, these people didn’t actually see what Matthew thinks they saw. I should phrase that differently, the soldiers, apparently, not only witnessed the most important and impressive miracle of all time — they had the BEST front row seats to the most important miracle of all time — and THEY were unimpressed? And years later, this story of how unimpressed these first hand witnesses were is supposed to impress me?

“Even allowing for all the supernatural events to occur, this story doesn’t convince me of anything except the absolutely ludicrous nature of the story itself.” — Conversational Atheist

(6) “Suggesting a married Jesus is one thing, but questioning the Resurrection undermines the very heart of Christian belief.” — Dan Brown

(7) “I cannot say my yes to legends that have been clearly and fancifully created. If I could not move my search beyond angelic messengers, empty tombs, and ghostlike apparitions, I could not say yes to Easter. … If the resurrection of Jesus cannot be believed except by assenting to the fantastic descriptions included in the Gospels, then Christianity is doomed. For that view of resurrection is not believable, and if that is all there is, then Christianity, which depends upon the truth and authenticity of Jesus’ resurrection, also is not believable.“ — Bishop John Shelby Spong

(8) “Religion is a symptom of irrational belief and groundless hope. … Either God doesn’t exist, or he’s unimaginably cruel.” — Hugh Laurie

(9) “It is not more surprising to be born twice than once; everything in nature is resurrection.” — Voltaire

(10) “… various Deist works and responses were translated into French and German. Voltaire (who lived in England in 1726-29), Rousseau and others added their powerful pens to argue that reason must prevail. Voltaire attributed ‘the doctrines of Christianity to the encrustations with which the church overlaid the simple teachings of Jesus, who, he said, never preached a single dogma of Christianity.’

“Rousseau wrote that he would not believe in a miracle even if the witnesses numbered a thousand.

“Diderot wrote that he would not believe in a resurrection even if everyone in Paris were to say that they saw it themselves. It is simply more reasonable to believe that all the witnesses are mistaken than to believe in a miracle.” — Michael Morrion, Ph.D.

(11) “In 1776, Edward Gibbon, in Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, provided an indirect challenge to the resurrection by providing a naturalistic explanation for the growth of Christianity. He did not deny a supernatural cause, but offered ‘secondary’ causes: Jewish zeal, the hope of heaven and threat of hell, miracles throughout church history, strict morality, and church authority. The mention of miracles was a two-edged sword, however, since many of Gibbon’s contemporaries denied the veracity of miracles reported by Eusebius and others. By putting biblical miracles on an equal level with later reports, Gibbon invited questions about the historicity of the biblical miracles as well. These ‘secondary’ causes were sufficient, however: ‘Given these five factors along with the decline in zeal for paganism, the success of Christianity was all but inevitable; in fact almost any superstition that had come along would have displaced the decayed paganism of that era’.” — Michael Morrion, Ph.D.

(12) “I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live: And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die.” — John 11:25-26