I avoid saying it because people already have a concept of it framed in their minds-- a point of light or consciousness that controls everything. But this is a short-sighted view of it, definitely not what I am referring to. A centralized entity contradicts omnipresence. Therefore, I used to say the divine. Consider how people conceptualize the divine-- expansive, infinite, spiritual, and ecstatic. But it too isn't what I want to say.
The image evoked by the word "divine" is itself limited by the concept of it, which I myself introduced when I said it. By saying the word "divine", I created the same trap I wanted to evade by not saying "God". I still ended up conveying a concept or "an image of God". But the moment you form an image, it is no longer what I talking of.
The act of making invokes "a maker", which is the self(ego) here. It becomes your God, your invention, not the God. However, truth is not an invention but a discovery.
See, when you give up all knowledge and all concepts of God, you might have a realization, but you can't say it. Saying it requires putting it into a concept or an image. "Those who know don't speak. Those who speak don't know." Ever heard this one?