The fact that both WW I & II were both started by the most powerful countries in the world, whose rulers were all overtly Christian and whose populations were overwhelmingly Christian as well , clearly demonstrates that Christianity may do nothing to make people "more moral," and may actually contribute a great deal to making people immoral instead.
While those two World Wars should be all of the evidence necessary for the thoughtful Christian to seriously reconsider whether their religion actually leads people to be more moral - since everywhere the Christian proclaims that "a tree can be known by its fruit," and 38 million people died during WW I and perhaps as many as 80 during WW II- the endorphic power of their confirmation bias prevents them from ever doing so.
This is not surprising, however, since it is only too human for people to allow their biases to see only the virtues of our respective beliefs as being truly reflective of their beliefs, and the vices as being simply an aberration. But that is the point! Because religion convinces people that they are NOT seeing the world through the subjective perceptions of their own confirmation biases, even though it so clearly is. So if religion acts just like any other "belief," and indeed convinces people to hate others who are different or to go to war for God, what good is it?
Christians and Muslims alike claim that "religion" or a "belief in God" makes people more moral, even when the evidence suggests otherwise. But worse than this, what such a claim overlooks is that our morality is based exclusively on what it means to be human - and literally nothing else!
Our Morality is Purely Human
Have you ever wondered why we do not extend our own "morality" to animals, for example? Well, in addition to the belief that we are special and the universe was made exclusively for us, it is obviously because we do not think that the nature of animals is anything like the nature of humans (which is probably true, since animals seem much more civilized, by comparison - they don't kill each other for simply being gay, or a different race, or having the wrong beliefs, etc.). As such, those "damn dirty" animals don't deserve to be treated with anything but utter contempt. After all, humans are sooooo superior! (Yeah, right.)
Hence, our morality is directly tied to ourselves, and more importantly, it it tied to our ideas about what it means to be human, even though some animals - like bonobos and chimpanzees - are pretty damn close to being like humans. But that doesn't stop us from treating them like Jewish prisoners in a Nazi concentration camp ayway. Fuck those "damn dirty apes!"
And the more distant your nature is thought to be from human nature - like the cockroach, for example - the less deserving you are of any moral consideration at all. This is why the Tutsis and the Nazis referred to those they slaughtered as "cockroaches," of course.
Hence, everything we think about our morality is necessarily tied to our nature. And if we are made in the image and likeness of God, than it is perfectly irrational to think that a being so infinitely superior to ourselves would treat us as morally equal to itself, since we so clearly do not do the same thing to any other species, let alone to other humans who may be of different beliefs, gender, appetites, race, creed, color, etc. In fact, we would be just as likely to treat any species of aliens we encountered, no matter how superior in every way they may be to ourselves, in the exact same way people treated that "man-God" called Jesus.
That's why a "being" who's nature is different from our own, especially if it is far more advanced, would have no more reason to treat us better than we treat animals and cockroaches. Indeed, since even the animals and cockroaches see no need to treat us in any "moral" way, nor us them, it is only human hubris that assumes that a God or even a more advanced alien life force, or AI, would treat us any different than we treat cockroaches.