Perhaps the religious were simply wise enough to drop their knowledge in favor of hapiness?

and how do you communicate this information in a way that's digestible to as many people as possible?

I didn't necessarily say "evil", just not an absolute good. Like humans, with his own morality, but why would said morality be perfect? 

The general point was, however, no matter what morality god would have and would follow, he would himself describe it as good. So his word would provide no further insight on what true, objective morality would be. 

and that is why you use the scientific method to make observations as to what are the best principles for man to follow

if over a very long period of time some principles rise to the top as the best principles for man to live by

then you consider them to be a law such as observations that led to newton's third law for example

"For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction."

this can be compared to

"do onto others as you would have them do onto you"

the difference is simply that with regards to human interaction the principles are assigned to gods so that they can be communicated through stories

I'm not qualified to go too far into the details - but game theory does anayze situations seperately for rational players (understanding everything immediately, no matter the complexity) and limited players (only capable of following a limited strategy.) Sadly, the first kind (which obviously doesn't exist, in practice) is usually much, much easier to deal with...

What's interesting about the whole thing is, the players don't need to understand the game. Just know the rules (morality), and after that, reliably follow their interests. Then, game theory would allow to optimize the rules in a way tha could benefit all. It's not a completed subject, by any means - but a very intersting approach to utilitarianism.

"What's interesting about the whole thing is, the players don't need to understand the game. Just know the rules (morality), and after that, reliably follow their interests."

the problem here is how do they know the rules? or is the assumption being made that they just follow whatever they personally believe is moral?

Yes because quite frankly this either changes everything that we know or almost nothing ...

I'm not even sure what this so called 'god' is whether it is described in christian or other religious and largely considered mythological literature and even maybe scientific literature ...

I actually like it when people in general have this mindset with religion. Alot of negative things that happen in the name of religion to everyone and to people of religion just wouldn't happen if people stop trying to make laws or make other people live their lives based on those beliefs. 

Out of the many examples you could use, many of which would be absolutely horrible, you've picked out the ones you view as positive.  As opposed to god's stance on slavery, unruly children, men lying with men, raiding towns and taking virgins, etc.  Because you're using the sense of morality you have, and judging god based on that.  Not the other way around.

Garden of Eden.

To believe in something this grand for so many requires great orchestration and intelligence for the time period which the Bible was compiled. To give people this much information about the supposed paranormal history of the world is either four things:

1: it's the truth (an accurate paranormal history told through metaphors)

2: it's a half-truth (taken partially from reality and from other cultures stories)

3: It's a lie (deception)

4: it was a moral-cautionary tale that was never meant to be taken seriously by the few, but to calm the masses.