Words, to the Wise

Words, to the Wise

One of the problems with the word “spirit”—in addition to its association with ghostly entities—is that it is definitionally “regarded as separate from matter.” Where one uses the word spirit (which I think it best to avoid) as an alternate to Omnipresence (or Absolute, That, etc.), it must be made clear that, in its all-pervasiveness, it is not separate from any thing. This is why “soul” is an even more troublesome word: “An entity regarded as being part of a person, thought of as separate from the body.” Thus all of the theological references to “your” soul, “my” soul, the “sinner’s” soul, the “redeemed” soul, et al—the soul which is presumed to transmigrate (individually) to Heaven. This has no relevance at all to that which is characterized as utterly formless, permeating infinitely and eternally, “nowhere that it’s not.” Why resort to ambiguously confusing terms when clearer secular terms are available?