Richard Dawkins says "What if you're wrong?"

[Meatball]

You could go far in emphasizing how a mass murderer would go to heaven over an atheist simply for believing in Jesus Christ. Does that make sense?

I'd just like to point out that this would have no bearing either way on the truth of the religion. Just because Christianity has rules you don't agree with doesn't make it false.

Firstoff one can observe that such an addition technically is a non-sequitur for it is a normative statement not a logical necessity to worship good entities.

Which was my point to begin with?

Secondly, being right on existence can coexist with being wrong on the moral clause. Consistency of moral statements can be evaluated independently from the existence clause. This is why it is easier to reject most theisms on basis of the morals they present.

My whole point was that consistency of moral statements is independant of a religions truth. I don't understand what you're trying to say.