I believe that the foundation of the Christian argument for the historicity of the bodily resurrection of Jesus consists of generalizations and assumptions about the beliefs and habits of ancient peoples living more than twenty centuries ago. If any Christian apologist claims that there is very strong evidence to prove the bodily Resurrection of Jesus as an historical event, ask him (or her) this one question:
“Can you prove that the Christian generalizations about the beliefs and habits of first century Jews, Romans, and other ancient peoples never had exceptions?”
—If he says there were never any exceptions, you can consider the apologist a liar or a fool.
—If he says that exceptions are “possible, but unlikely”, then he has just defeated his own argument. By definition a “miracle” is the most unlikely of all explanations for an event. If an alternative, non-miracle explanation is “possible”, by definition, it is more probable/likely to be the correct explanation.