Not really. If one looks at the in flight failures of these new turbines as compared to the old 707 turbines, statistically you are safer with a two engined 757, 767 or the 787 dream liners.
It all has to due with hours to failure. Four turbines that fail often are much less safer than 2 turbines that fail at a much lower rate.
I have crossed the ocean many many times in the old 707s and miss them. The last time was 1981 on Pan Am from DC to London. The new aircraft with only two engines are safer.
I accept that the newer engines make a two engine jet safer than the old four engine 707.
But imagine a new jet with four new engines.... now that would be safe :-)
Safe, but a real fuel guzzler.
The engines on the Me-262 had a mtbf (Mean Time Between Failure) of about 10 hours and a mission endurance of about one hour. With two engines, there was about a 20% chance of losing at least one engine. The US (and Britain) had fighter jets with better reliability, but they did not meet the operational needs of either force.
There is also the problem of common mode failures, e.g., bird strikes, bad fuel, unusual environmental conditions, in which the likelihood of losing four engines about the same as the likelihood of losing one.