[The_Reader_David]

Ah, you don't read Greek do you. The words in the commandment in the Greek Old Testament (the Septuigent or LXX, translated by the Jews in the 3rd century AD, and quoted from by most NT writers--only when playing with the Hebrew vowels is necessary to get a prophecy to be plain do any of them stray from the LXX) are eidolon (idol) and homoioma (likeness). There is nothing against an eikon (icon, or image).

The Fathers also point out that any attempt to make an image of the unseen God before the Incarnation would necessarily be false. Things changed with the Incarnation: God took on humanity, and with it depictability; God also entered into matter in a new way in the Incarnation. To deny the appropriateness of the Holy Icons ultimately always comes down to a doubt about the reality of the Incarnation. Once one depicts Christ, what argument is there against depicting His Mother, and his friends, the saints? Do you oppose all representational art as do strict Muslims?

As to the honor shown to the Holy Icons. The Fathers point out that the honor shown an image is actually honor directed toward the prototype (another reason idols are wicked--either their prototype is something dishonorable, a beast or demon, or nonexistent). We do the same with symbols, we salute the flag, and are angry when people desecrate it.

There is a wonderful story about on of the saints who opposed the iconocasts (an Emperor of your opinion). The Emperor argued with the saint (a monk) that the honor shown an icon was honor directed at the matter, not at the prototype. The monk took a coin with the Emperor's portrait on the obverse, threw it on the ground and ground it into the stones with his heel. The Emperor was outraged and sent the monk to eternal glory as a holy martyr.

[Havoc]

The Fathers also point out that any attempt to make an image of the unseen God before the Incarnation would necessarily be false. Things changed with the Incarnation: God took on humanity, and with it depictability; God also entered into matter in a new way in the Incarnation. To deny the appropriateness of the Holy Icons ultimately always comes down to a doubt about the reality of the Incarnation. Once one depicts Christ, what argument is there against depicting His Mother, and his friends, the saints? Do you oppose all representational art as do strict Muslims?

Show me where the commandment makes exceptions. Get out your Bible and read what it says, then show me where it makes any exceptions. Read it a couple of times if you need to. You'll find it makes no exceptions. Don't make to yourselves images. Not of men, birds, fish Animals that walk the earth. Don't bow to them.... nowhere in there does it say "except if it's me or one of my followers. Then it's ok." No, it says anyone doing these things will suffer the wrath of the lord who imposes his judgements down through 4 generations (Sinner, Sinner's kids, Sinner's grandkids, Sinner's great grandkids). You want personal, God made it personal, if you screw up, he'll make your great grandchildren sorry you did it. He is merciful too; but, he doesn't play games.