 The use of metaphors to describe the relationship between God and the world has been challenged in the broader panentheistic discussion about how to describe the relationship between God and the world. McFague argues that any attempt to do theology requires the use of metaphor (2001, 30) and for Peacocke the limitation of language requires the use of models and metaphors in describing both God and the cosmos (Schaab 2008, 13). The primary objection to the dominant metaphor in panentheism of the world as God’s body is the substantialistic implications of the term “body” that lead either to an ontological separation between the world and God or to a loss of identity for God or the world. Clayton proposes different levels of metaphor as the most adequate way to reconcile the conflict between divine action and the integrity of the created realm (2003, 208). Further, Bracken finds that the soul–body metaphor lacks clarity about the freedom and self-identity of the creatures in relations to God (1992, 211). Case-Winters faults the soul–body metaphor for tending to see the soul as dominating the body and failing to recognize the world as a unified organism (1995, 251, 254).