One of the most influential books that has shaped my theological understanding is NT Wright's The Resurrection of the Son of God. It's beast of a scholarly work (over 800 pages) - theologically and historically deep, and demonstrates, with devastating logic, the incredible historical case for the Resurrection. Let me give you part of his conclusion:
The actual bodily resurrection of Jesus clearly provides a sufficient condition of the tomb being empty and the "meetings [with Jesus after his death]" taking place. Nobody is likely to doubt that. Once grant that Jesus really was raised, and all the pieces of the historical jigsaw puzzle of early Christianity fall into place. But my claim is stronger than that--that the bodily resurrection of Jesus provides a necessary condition for these things; in other words, that no other explanation could or would do. What alternative account can be offered which will explain the data just as well, which can provide an alternative sufficient explanation for all the evidence? Historical argument alone cannot forced anyone to believe that Jesus was raised from the dead; but historical argument is remarkably good at clearing away the undergrowth behind which skepticisms of various sorts have been hiding. The proposal that Jesus was bodily raised from the dead possesses unrivaled power to explain the historical data at the heart of early Christianity.
You can see a 2 minute video of his argument in summary form here.