Wow. Does anybody have some good info abut this aspect of Judaism, wikipedia doesn't have much. Specifically I'd like to know the historical reliable sources about it, not the qoutes from the Bible, that is, I'm interested in the evidence for and against the use of illustrations among the Jews.
I don't believe the permission to illustrate the megillah has anything to do with G-d's name not being mentioned, as there are accepted illustrations of Tanach (where G-d's name is mentioned) across the spectrum. As long as there is no depiction of G-d it is fine.
As an orthodox Jew, I have no reason to believe that any other orthodox Jew would be OK with making a depiction of G-d. If someone else did, it would just be avoided. I can't speak for any other denominations.
Another thing an orthodox Jew might do is preface any anthropomorphic mention of G-d with "kavayachol" meaning "as if it were possible" (loosely translated as "so to speak"), in recognition of the fact that G-d cannot be prescribed physical qualities.
Edit: just saw your note about historical precedence. For an orthodox Jew there is no separation of what it says in the Torah and what has happened historically. We follow a masoretic tradition as to the interpretation of the Torah. So as I said above, I can't imagine an orthodox Jew being OK with a depiction of G-d from a Torah standpoint.
You should be more exact: It's not possible to make an image of G-d since G-d does not have a form, so it doesn't matter what image is made, it's certain that that is not an image of G-d.
What's forbidden is to make an image and consider it a (or as) G-d. Not that it is (necessarily) an image of G-d.
http://www.jewfaq.org/human.htm#Image and http://www.jewfaq.org/g-d.htm
This may be the wikipedia page you're looking for:
Finally as the joke goes in Judaism. You've got 2 Jews in a room and 5 conflicting opinions.
The fact that the Megilla doesn't contain the name of God is an interesting phenomenon and the source of a lot of commentary, but not for this reason.
What's prohibited is a 3 dimensional form (i.e. like a sculpture, not just thickness as from the layers of paint and the like). A 2D image is fine unless there is intent to worship it.
There are some additional details, for example an image of a celestial being (sun, moon, angel, etc) is assumed to be for worship, unless known otherwise, while an earthy image is not assumed that way.