The English word for “God” has become a source of confusion for Christians since at least the Anglo-Saxon era. Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary says that the origin of the word ‘god’ comes from a Germanic word ‘gad,’ pronounced as “gohdt.” .....

http://www.bibleanswerstand.org/God.htm

http://www.bibleanswerstand.org/God_2.htm

There are thousands of books written by philosophers, Theosophists, theologians, clerics, historians, skeptics, anarchists etc etc.. All of whom use words to describe what they describe as the ultimate authority within the Universe.

The words become meaningless if the ultimate authority is not something that is directly experienced and surrendered to within the experience of life as the source of life.

Preachers preach from their definitions of reality. Teachers who are stable within the experience of surrender to the Supreme, don't isolate definitions to certain words, especially when the supreme is indefinable.

The Vedic texts are comprised of thousands of volumes speaking to the knowledge and experience of the Supreme or the absolute. The word God is just as valid as any other pointing sign that will lead the intellect toward the experience and immersion of the intellect into the awareness of the Supreme being.

Sanskrit has a unique way of conveying the essence of something thru its structure of words.. One word can have ten different meanings. Deciphering the meanings of Sanskrit Teachings becomes a process of refined awareness and expanded consciousness. One person can decipher a passage and come up with cows while another can translate the same text and unveil a description of the divine presence.

Lots of people know things. But then lots of people are surrendered not to the supreme being, but to the personal ego, and as such cannot give anything to anyone other than what exists within their own nervous system. Which is the struggling intellect with a need to convey the attachment of personal meaning, to a diverse group of individuals who all live within their own beliefs, with their own terminology.

The struggling intellect will take shots at something with words, like throwing darts at a dart board blindfolded trying to hit a mark. Sometimes if they are lucky they might hit the board with the marks, but not often does the blindly thrown dart hit a mark of any measure.

Someone could come to speak of spirituality to a group of English speaking individuals and give a discourse in Finnish and get nowhere. Often this is the same scenario for the preacher or reverend of any church who has in their own determination lived within a belief system that is structured to a personal experience and study limited to certain words and definitions of those words.

In the Bible there is a story of the "Sermon on the mount". In the story Jesus speaks to a diverse group of people who do not speak in the same language, nor do they have the same beliefs. The scenario is an analogy of how the master steps aside of the ego to speak thru a surrendering("I and my Father are One", "What the Father witness in me, I witness in Him", kind of surrender), to the supreme being, allowing the holy spirit or the voice of God to speak.
In the story of the Sermon on the mount, every person who heard Jesus speak, heard the words in their own language and thru their personal beliefs.
This is not magic, its just something that takes place beyond the boundaries of personality and individual knowing and belief. It is something that supersedes the boundaries of personal ego.
There is a saying: You can lead a horse to water...Well these horses were really thirsty!

There is a saying: "Those with the eyes to see and the ears to hear"... It represents the intellect which has stepped out of the boundaries of individualism and can hear the same voice in a diverse experience of people all speaking different words about the same thing. It requires a greater humility than one who insists on glorifying their personality and personal history to exemplify a single path of focus on a set of defining terms.
In my experience there aren't many out there with the capability. It is something that requires innocence such as that of a child that has no preconceptions and has not locked themselves into a "my way of thinking."

Another thing that is prominent in preachers of personal opinion and belief, is the need to have someone listen.
It is psychological in its nature. Without some kind of validation, the feeling that ones life has had no meaning invades the belief and opinion of the personal.

Mt 7:6 Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you.

This particular piece from scripture says two things. Waste no knowledge on the mind that is closed and non receptive, and it speaks toward the more important factor which was brought up in the beginning of this post. The personal cannot speak effectively to the masses of diversity. Only one voice can and that is non-personal and can connect itself to any living intellect. It speaks consistently and gently nudges the intellect toward Truth that is not personal or relative even tho it can speak within relative boundaries of personality and limitation.

For one to utter that voice, one has to step out of the way of personal opinion and the knowing of belief and individuality.

I was addicted to the Hokey Pokey, but then I turned myself around!!