Thanks for the interesting posts this month and your essay that made me stop and think for a moment.
Here's another of your comments that made me stop and think for a moment; "It is interesting that so many focus on trying to prove or disprove that the image is of Christ."
Personally, I take the view that proving or disproving, believing or disbelieving has no relevance to the fact of whether or not it is the image of Christ. As far as I'm concerned, if it is, it is; if it isn't, it isn't. Whether or not I believe it, or not, doesn't change what it is.
To digress, much of the discussion on this board is concerned with proving or disproving something or other. Let me use the example of the purpose of the Great Pyramid [if the moderators can tolerate a slight deviation from topic?]. The purpose for the construction of the Great Pyramid is not going to change, regardless of whether that purpose is proved or disproved, or whether anyone believes it if it is proved.
For this reason, I tend to stay away from these proving/disproving debates; i.e. whether or not I accept the proof or disproof, isn't going to change what the purpose of the Great Pyramid actually was, nor whether the shroud or Turin is or isn't the burial cloth of Jesus.
Any ideas on this approach to these debates?