There is a problem with the reasoning here.
"If statement X were true, it would be nice according to my religion" is in no way a valid argument to support statement X. The nature does not owe you nice things. Also, neither does God, if he exists.
I personally try to avoid mixing religion and science. In certain areas, they may coexist. Like, we don't know the fundamental mechanism of the gravity – we haven't discovered the graviton, and even if we had, we don't know how the gravitons are actually being made. We cannot prove that the gravity was created by God, but also we cannot prove that it was not. And this uncertainty is what leaves space for different religions. And by all means: I admit that I am not a very religious person myself, but as far as they don't try to affect my personal life, I don't mind if other people are.
The globe theory works well enough with or without religion. The flat theory, on the other hand, only seems to work with religion (that is, our planet being the only one there is, something special when compared to anything else in the entire universe). Still, there seem to be some non-religious persons who believe in it, and my genuine interest to try to understand the reasoning behing that is one of the reasons I am on this forum in the first place.