A useful distinction I make between dangerous and safe religious beliefs is specifically whether they are prophet-based, or based on communal observations.

A prophet is someone who has special access to the will of God, for example Moses, Jesus, Mohammed, or Joseph Smith.

There are many beliefs that a community can arrive at collectively (for instance, that it's good to look after orphans and widows), without relying on a prophet or other singular authority figure to teach them. These types of beliefs are safe, because they are rational, which means people can sort them out by talking to each other.

Whereas prophet-based beliefs are dangerous, because people can't sort them out by talking to each other: it's all a matter of which prophet one person trusts and whether other people trust the "right" prophet or not.

But so if you then throw out / ignore all prophet-based beliefs, you end up losing all the things that distinguish Christianity from Islam from Judaism from Mormonism and any other religions. What you are left with is secularism, which is, I think, the only safe belief system for the human global community to survive and thrive in the long run.