Often in discussions the question is asked, “what would it take for you to change your mind?” Though this question is not always asked with honest motives, it is a good question to ponder and to answer for oneself. I have not spent a ton of time thinking about this question and I reserve the right to adjust my answer as I learn more, but for now, here are a few things that would have to be in place for me to change my mind about the truthfulness of the Christian worldview:
#1 A consistent historical paradigm wherein Jesus’ resurrection is not the best explanation of the facts surrounding his crucifixion
Given the facts at hand (Jesus was crucified on a Roman cross, Jesus’ tomb was found empty, Jesus’ disciples claimed to see the risen Jesus, and the explosive beginning of the Christian faith, etc.) Jesus’ resurrection is the best explanation of what happened that fateful day almost 2,000 years ago. All counter-explanations fail or are on par with conspiracy theories. We know Jesus did exist and did die on that cross, his disciples would have been unable/unwilling to steal the body, and Christianity would not have taken off in the hostile environment of second temple Jewish dogmatism and Roman persecution without some earth-shattering cause.
Nevertheless, if there was a historical paradigm that accounted for these facts, and was internally consistent, demonstrating that Jesus did not rise from the dead, then it would cause me to heavily reconsider some things.
#2 A logically sound explanation for the existence of objective moral facts and duties
Objective moral facts and duties exist. It is always wrong (and always will be wrong) to torture children for pleasure. What is the metaphysically adequate explanation for this reality? Since objective moral facts and duties exist, there must be a moral standard which transcends the provincial and the transient. In other words, moral facts and duties cannot be the product of majority rule, governmental sanctions, or any other human-lead process. Further, moral facts and duties cannot be culturally contingent because they transcend culture. If evolution (somehow) conditioned us to have the moral compass we do, then objective moral facts and duties cease to exist because at one time they did not (i.e. it would not be true that it has always been wrong to torture children for pleasure). The reality of these objective moral facts and duties demonstrate an objective moral standard and a giver of that standard.
Nevertheless, if it can be demonstrated that objective moral facts and duties do not exist or that they can be accounted for without an objective standard or standard giver, then I would have a lot to think about.
#3 A demonstration that the first or second premise of the Kalam cosmological argument is false
The Kalam cosmological argument goes as follows: 1) whatever begins to exist has a cause, 2) the universe began to exist, 3) therefore the universe has a cause. I’ve seen many people grow frustrated with this argument because it is like really good. Like all sound and valid syllogisms, to falsify this argument one would have to demonstrate that one of the two premises are false. Few go after the first premise (it is hard to prove that things can begin to exist without a cause). Many instead try to demonstrate that the universe did not begin to exist. They usually argue that the universe is eternal, has an infinite number of causes, was popped out by a multiverse generator (was the multiverse generator caused by a multiverse generator generator?), or something else.
Still, if one can demonstrate how one of the first two premises are false, I would have to reconsider.
But, here’s the thing. This list represents only the tip of the iceberg regarding things that would have to be refuted for me to change my mind. In fact, one of the strongest arguments for the validity of the Christian worldview is the cumulative case for Christianity.
Do you think you can demonstrate one of the things listed above and get me to think and possibly change my position? I encourage your comments below. If you are not a Christian, what would it take for you to change your mind and become a Christian?
 This list is by no means exhaustive, but it would be a good start to getting me to change my mind.
 To read more on the legitimacy of Jesus’s resurrection check out these articles here.
 To read more about objective morality check out these articles here, here, here, and here.
 William Lane Craig deals with many objections here. There have also been many articles written about the Kalam on The Daily Apologist.