In reply to:[color:"blue"]I believe the same spiritual tensions exist today with the written Word of God or the preached Word of God (we all need spiritual ears too). What's more, none of these media can capture the full range of His voice, His light, His truth, etc., but they are accurate in so far as they go. A linguistic token does not have to be comprehensive or infinite in order to be accurate and effective (else, we could not communicate).
While it is true that some of the same spiritual tensions exist in other forms of communication, the seeing sense is set apart in scripture as the "queen" of the senses. We are not told for example that "to hear Him is to know Him", nor are we told that "He is sound", thus the secondary senses have communicative power but not the same power given them by scripture.
Jn12:45 And he that seeth me seeth him that sent me. Jn14:7 If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also: and from henceforth ye know him, and have seen him. Jn 14:17 Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you. Jn14:19 Yet a little while, and the world seeth me no more; but ye see me: because I live, ye shall live also.
It would seem to me that this is the key to your question about the unique prohibition with respect to images in scripture which we don't find with respect to these other senses. Because seeing has a unigue capability to convey a more full comprehension of the object beheld, as the above freferenced scriptures clearly imply, it would seem that the mode of conveying that comprehension has been singled out as the most potentially damaging as it alone would have the greatest potential for abuse.
Thus, we are not flatly prohibited from speaking of Him, unless it be falsely as in taking His name in vain, as we are prohibited from making an image of Him
