THE PROPHETS, THE PRIESTHOOD, AND THE IMAGE Of GOD 329 fact that they are embedded within or linked to explicit anti-idol state- ments strengthen the possibility of their use as an aniconic rhetorical strategy. A word of explanation may be needed at this point. I restrict the investigation to modelling similes. These are similes that have been shown to function metaphorically. There are other types of similes, also referred to as illustrative similes, in which two parties are compared point for point, which do not act like metaphors. for instance, “a pony is like a horse”, or “the sun is like a golden ball” 35. unlike these sim- iles, modelling similes are characterized by the interrelationship of two distinct ideas, often referred to as the tenor and the vehicle, whereby the concept of the tenor is altered by the concept of the vehicle. A new entity is thus created that is equivalent neither to the tenor nor to the vehicle alone. As with metaphor, a simile can be expressed more ful- ly with verbs that elucidate the compared image. There are two main camps in the metaphor debate 36 delineated according to whether a metaphor should be understood primarily as a literary phenomenon (Max Black) 37 or whether it is exclusively a cognitive one (George Lakoff and his co-authors) 38. Since the analysis of metaphors about the deity of ancient Israel proceeds from the study of texts, I under- stand metaphor as a type of literary language that affects the cognitive level; that is, metaphor is conveyed by the written word and has the potential to generate new ways of thinking about and perceiving God, the human condition, relationality, etc 39. metaphors that portray God as mother in Hosea 11, see H. SCHüNGEL-STRAu- MANN, “Gott als Mutter in Hosea 11”, TQ 166 (1986) 119-134. 35 The latter example is found in J.M. SOSKICE, Metaphor and Religious Language (Oxford 1985) 58. 36 This overview to metaphor theory is reduced due to space concerns. Ex- amples of different applications of metaphor theory to biblical literature are found in a volume edited by P. VAN HECKE, Metaphor in the Hebrew Bible (BETL 187; Leuven 2005). A fuller treatment of metaphor with more references can be found in MIDDLEMAS, “Divine Presence in Absence”, 197-200; and ID., The Divine Im- age, 104-109. 37 M. BLACK, Models and Metaphor. Studies in Language and Philosophy (Ithaca, Ny 1962); and ID., “More about Metaphor”, Metaphor and Thought (ed. A. ORTONy) (Cambridge 1979) 19-43. 38 E.g. G. LAKOff – M. JOHNSON, Metaphors We Live By (Chicago, IL 1980); G. LAKOff, Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things. What Categories Reveal About the Mind (Chicago, IL 1987); G. LAKOff – M. TuRNER, More Than Cool Reason. A field Guide to Poetic Metaphor (Chicago, IL 1989). 39 for examples of this approach, see E.f. KITTAy, Metaphor: Its Cognitive