In a former paper I considered the evidences of the immaculate life of Christ: in this I shall inquire into its importance, as it stands connected with the truth of Christianity itself, and of some of its most interesting branches.

First, If the life of our Lord Jesus Christ was immaculate, it must go a great way towards proving the truth of the gospel which he taught, and of that religion which he inculcated. If Jesus Christ was “a virtuous and an amiable man,” as Mr. Paine himself acknowledges, he must have been what he professed to be—the Son of God, and the Saviour of the world. To allege, as this writer does, that “Christ wrote no account of himself—that the history of him is altogether the work of other people,” is mere trifling. If the history that is written of him is undeserving of credit, how came Mr. Paine to know any thing about either the amiableness of his character, or the excellence of that morality which he preached and practised? He knows nothing of either the one or the other but through the medium of the evangelical history; and if he admit this history in one case, with what consistency can he reject it in another?

Mr. Paine affects to rank Christianity with other religions—with heathenism and Mahomedism, calling the New Testament writers “The Christian mythologists;” but what founder or teacher of any religion will he resort to whose character will bear any comparison with that of Christ? Among the sages of antiquity, or the teachers of what is called the religion of nature, there is not one to be found whose life will bear a thorough scrutiny. Natural religion itself must be ashamed of its advocates; and as to Mahomet, there is scarcely any thing in his character but a combination of ambition, brutality, and lust, at the sight of which nature itself revolts. “Go,” says an eloquent writer, “to your natural religion; lay before her Mahomet and his disciples, arrayed in armour of blood, riding in triumph over the spoils of thousands and ten thousands, who fell by his victorious sword. Show her the cities which he set in flames, the countries which he ravished and destroyed, and the miserable distress of all the inhabitants of the earth. When she has viewed him in this scene, carry her into his retirements. Show her the prophet’s chambers, his concubines, and his wives, let her see his adultery, and hear him allege revelation and his Divine commission to justify his lust and his oppression. When she is tired of this prospect, then show her the blessed Jesus, humble and meek, doing good to all the sons of men, patiently instructing both the ignorant and the perverse. Let her see him in his most retired privacies. Let her follow him to the mount, and hear his devotions and supplications to God. Carry her to his table, to view his poor fare, and hear his heavenly discourse. Let her see him injured, not provoked. Let her attend him to the tribunal, and consider the patience with which he endured the scoff and the reproach of his enemies. Lead her to the cross, and let her view him in the agonies of death, and hear his last prayer for his persecutors, ‘Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do!’

“When natural religion has viewed both, ask which is the prophet of God? But her answer we have already had, when she saw part of this scene through the eyes of the centurion who attended at his cross; by him she spoke, and said, ‘Truly this man was the Son of God.’ ”*

To admit the amiableness of Christ’s moral character, and yet reject the evangelical history of him, is choosing a very untenable ground. The history which the evangelists have given of Christ evinces its own authenticity. A character so drawn is a proof of its having really existed, and of those who drew it possessing a mind congenial with it. If Christ had not been that immaculate character which they represent, they could not have so described him. It is not in the power of man to invent any thing like it; the imagination of impostors, especially, would have been utterly unequal to the task; such a picture could not have been drawn without an original corresponding with it. Writers of fiction have often produced wonderful characters; they have emblazoned their heroes with extraordinary charms, but they are charms of a different kind from what Jesus possessed. The beauties of holiness are not to be collected, in the manner in which the sacred writers have collected them, by the power of imagination; and as the existence of the picture implies the reality of the original, so also it proves the congeniality of mind possessed by those who drew it. Let the moral character of Christ have been ever so fair, a set of impostors could not possibly have drawn it in the manner in which it is drawn; for this, it was necessary that it should be not only observed, but felt, and loved, and imitated. If Judas had written a history of Christ, it would have been a very different one from those which are transmitted to us, even though it had been of a piece with his confession, “I have betrayed innocent blood.”

I am not inclined to call Mr. Paine, what he calls the sacred writers, either fool or liar; but methinks it were no great labour to prove him to be both. It certainly was no mark of wisdom in him to acknowledge Christ to be “an amiable character, and that he taught and practised morality of the most benevolent kind,” in an attempt to overturn Christianity; and the flagrant manner in which he has belied the sacred writers must be manifest to every one that is in the least acquainted with them, and will take the trouble to compare them with what he has asserted concerning them.

Secondly, From the purity of Christ’s character arises an important part of his fitness for his undertaking; without this he could not have been a Priest, a sacrifice, or a Mediator. It was necessary that the priests of Aaron’s order should be “without blemish,” and their sacrifices “without spot,” Lev. 21:21; Numb. 27:3, 9, 11. This purity, it is true, was of a ceremonial kind, but it was typical of that which was moral; for in reference to this it is said of Christ, that “such an High Priest became us, who is holy, harmless undefiled, and separate from sinners.—We are redeemed, not with silver and gold, but with the precious blood of Christ, as of a Lamb without blemish and without spot.—He hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin, that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.” The priests under the law were but ceremonially clean; they needed “daily to offer up sacrifices, first for their own sins, and then for the people’s:” but Christ “offered himself once without spot to God,” and thereby “perfected for ever them that are sanctified.” A polluted being might endure the demerit of sin, as the ungodly actually will; but he cannot make atonement for it, so as to “make an end” of it. The world might have borne its own iniquity, but it is the “Lamb of God” only that can “bear it away.” And as it was an important part of the priestly office to mediate, and make intercession for the people, so Christ is our Mediator and Intercessor before the throne: “With his blood he entered once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us.” This mediation is founded upon his sacrifice: and the acceptableness of the former depends upon his spotless purity equally with the latter. A mediator could in no case be admitted to plead in behalf of a criminal, unless he himself were innocent. Had Moses been guilty of idolatry at Horeb, he could not have mediated on behalf of Israel. Our “Advocate with the Father is Jesus Christ the righteous.” Though he mingled with sinners, yet he must be holy, harmless, and undefiled, and separate from them; and though he pleaded for sinners, yet he must not extenuate their sin, but condemn it without reserve, and justify the righteous government of God, by which it was threatened with destruction. It was on this account that the mediation of Christ was so highly acceptable to God, and so gloriously successful, that he gave him the desire of his heart. “Thou lovest righteousness, and hatest wickedness: therefore God, thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows.”

Thirdly, From the spotless purity of Christ’s character arises his fitness to be the great Exemplar after which we should be formed, and which it should be our daily practice to imitate. God hath “predestinated us to be conformed to the image of his Son.” Jesus saith to the weary and heavy laden, “Learn of me, for I am meek and lowly of heart, and ye shall find rest unto your souls.” One great object of the Holy Spirit is to “glorify Christ;” and this he doth, not only by “receiving of the things of Christ, and showing them unto us;” but by working, as I may say, by his spotless life as a model, and forming our souls into a resemblance of it. And as the Holy Spirit “glorifieth Christ” in his operations upon us, so also must we glorify him by voluntarily copying after his example.

The nature of man is such that he requires an example before his eyes. We all feel a strong propensity to imitation. Hence the danger of evil, and the benefit of good company; and hence the superior effect of example, in ministers and heads of families, to mere precept. But where shall a suitable example be found? God is too much above us: our weak souls cannot look steadfastly at his glory. With angels we have but little or no acquaintance; and men, even the best of them, are stained with imperfections, which it would be dangerous to imitate. If we had been predestinated to be conformed to the image of the best merely human character, we should never “appear faultless before the presence of the Divine glory.” Whatever imperfections attend us in the present state, we require a perfect model, otherwise we shall never attain perfection in any state. The example of Christ is the only one that is adapted to our circumstances. In his face the glory of God is seen, without the eye of the mind being dazzled with its overwhelming lustre. In his character there is every thing to love, and in conforming to it nothing to fear. Happy are the men who are found “followers of the Lamb whithersoever he goeth!”

Fuller, A. G. (1988). “The Immaculate Life of Christ,” The Complete Works of Andrew Fuller: Expositions—Miscellaneous (J. Belcher, Ed.; Vol. 3, pp. 690–692). Sprinkle Publications.