basically the morals to all religions is:
A reason because these morals have many times failed (and very frequently totally caused the opposite results) in practice by the structures of religion is in part to be found in the same terms and the way to look at them. The fact is that all religions have started in a certain way and by and by the teachings exposed by the prophet/messiah/guru/whatever of that religion transformed itself in a thing completely different.
A cause of this is that language it's not the same thing as personal experience/knowledge and every term/sentence contains in itself a contradiction. Religions always started with a fundation that had pratical roots in themselves, and then transformed by and by in - and supported themselves only by - faith, to end with the paroxism that searching for that practical source becomes discouraged (when not becoming heresy) sometimes by the same structure leading the religion.
You have the prophets looked as rare cases, gifted individuals or sons of God or divinities etc. themselves, so regarded as unarrivable and their practical teachings have become only statements of faith. The same statements, then, acquired a certain interpretation (that's devoid of any practical experience behind, so without the possibility of knowing the meaning apart from speculation) that becomes a statement of faith itself: a statement of faith of a statement of faith.
Add to this then the different point of view on what God really is (coming again from speculation) and the terms, that are interpreted literally, assumes different meanings depending on this "vision of God".
With the terms you elencated you can see very well this behaviour.
1: be humble
This term has taken a flavor ranging from "false modesty", passing through "bow your head to others" till "know that you are a sinner, so behave as a sinner ashamed of being a sinner".
In real humility, however, there's no place for feeling yourself inferior to others (that, btw, it naturally implies that there is someone inferior and someone superior, and if you are the former to some, you are obviously the latter to some other), there's no place for modesty born from external considerations (that's born, in the same way, from the idea of inferior/superior) nor for sin coming from the same imposed morals of an absolute and external nature.
Real humility is born from the internal knowledge that there is - and there never will be - no end to the path, knowledge that "every man and every woman is a star" without difference in the quality and/or course thereof, and knowledge that the vehicle is and will never be, no matter what, perfect.
2: non-violent
I will consider this term only on the more "internal" meaning (that's probably the only one to be taken seriously in consideration), because the more literary meaning it's just evidence of yourself being a slave of your emotions (but also here all these terms shouldn't be considered as absolute dogma; example: if you are being attacked defending oneself can be plausible).
Also this stems from the impression of superiority/inferiority. If you consider the other a star as you are then there's no question of trying to impose your Will on him/her, because the other's Will has the same importance as your own.
However also here the term has become a sort of "never fight one another". There's nothing wrong on fighting like brothers. The universe was created and it is endured by attrition. Without exchange of point of views every form of knowledge will never renew itself.
The term, morover, also contains even more subtle meanings, as in, for example, the Tao. Another subtle meaning is the one of not opposing to change etc.
3: forgiveness
Forgiveness arises from the knowledge that "there's no difference between any one thing and another". Also in this case it has been "abused" as a sort of pretence that fighting one another is a bad thing in absolute.
It's interesting to note that this "not fight" as a very subtle (not in itself, but for its use) literal, interpretation has been used many times as a sort of assurance for the religion itself and the "structure" propagating the same (as the church). Example: the disciples are expected to never contest the dogma imposed by the teachers and the same religion as a whole.
4: love all beings
It has become "love all beings", where it should be "love every thing", and morover it's not the love as it can be understood by the usual meaning of the term. It is a love of a different (and higher) nature. It is somewhat easy to understand that this love is not tied to attachment and/or a need for a "result"; it is more difficult to understand that this love is not love born from emotion (and it is not necessarily tied to the emotion called "love") and it is devoid of purpouse. It is difference between "being love" and "acting with love".
This is the love of the true mystic, where 0 = 2.
If you step back to the level of emotion (as the term now implies) then, for example, hate can be a form of love stronger than the same love. Morover the "love all beings" turns the formula to all another thing, because in its real meaning it is one of the most powerful formulae to dissolve duality, uniting 1 and 1 (2) and dissolve them to none (0).
In the other literal meaning, however, it actually reinforces the same duality (making a difference between loving and any other emotion, for example) and it is an absolute form of conduct where the same should be individual instead. Taken to the literal extremes it can subtly reinforce the above mentioned "inferior/superior" point of view and in some way of using it, it can take a form of "love to obtain something in exchange" (why do you help the poor?", "I do it to reserve myself a place in heaven") and so actually turning love in a form of bargain instead.
And the most importent one
5: be close to your personal god who is in secret.
This is, as you say "the most important", and in fact, it's probably one of the chief motives (along lack of personal experience) of the twisting of all the others.
The way you look at God changes completely both what it is important to approach Him/Her (if there's even a question of trying to approach instead of relying in a general faith), and both the literal meaning of all the terms above. Lacking the personal knowledge of the terms, this is the only thing that remains for many religions and one of the principal motives that all those terms have turned sour and many times completely expressed themselves by their literal opposites in practice, by the structures leading that same religion.
Dilber MC Theme by HarzeM