Even before images of Christ were common place within the Church pagans mocked Christ. Celsus dedicated an entire book to it which then had Christians respond to it some centuries after. If on this basis that something could be used for mockery, should we not use words either when talking about Christ?
As for images not being historical, why do they need to be historical? The point of most eastern Iconography is to avoid attention to detail and convey the deeper truths. Jesus likely didn't look like he does in the Pantocrator but that conveys his humanity and his divinity. Most other iconography has that purpose as well and needs to be interpreted as much as any text does.
Pictures, images, symbols are not something I want Christianity to be devoid of. I would prefer they be there and for people to ponder them and ask questions about them than see a blank wall with maybe a cross.