“Behold, I send you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves: be ye therefore wise as serpents, and harmless as doves. But beware of men: for they will deliver you up to the councils, and they will scourge you in their synagogues; and ye shall be brought before governors and kings for my sake, for a testimony against them and the Gentiles.... And ye shall be hated of all men for my name’s sake: but he that endureth to the end shall be saved.... The disciple is not above his master, nor the servant above his lord. If they have called the master of the house Beelzebub, how much more shall they call them of his household?... He that taketh not his cross, and followeth after me, is not worthy of me. He that findeth his life shall lose it; and he that loseth his life for my sake shall find it.” Let us think of all this. Such an end to accomplish, such a plan, such a claim, such a promise! If Jesus was only a man this was lunacy, unless we should impeach his sincerity. Yet with perfect simplicity, perfect composure, perfect confidence, Jesus relies upon such a plan as this. It is not a man’s way at all; it is not only above and beyond a man’s way, it is unlike it, foreign to it, and impossible to a mere man. How do men plan? Read history; look about you. It is easy to find out from books; if you know how to read men it is easier to find out from observation. Alexander, Cæsar, Mohammed, among warriors and conquerors; Richelieu, Macchiavelli, Jefferson, Hamilton, Disraeli, Bismarck, among statesman and the men who know state-craft; the fathers and popes, Ignatius Loyola, Luther, Calvin, Wesley, among churchmen--these show us the methods of men. Studying the lives of those mentioned here and of others of their order we will find plans many and diverse--wise and foolish, good and bad--but they show a man’s way. If you wish something more like a parallel consider the plans of those who fastened what is called Buddhism, or Confucianism, upon hundreds of millions. Or consider Mohammedanism. In these systems we see the handiwork of men. The authors of these systems recognize the ordinary influences that determine men’s conduct and use them with rare human skill. These employ agencies that Jesus repudiates; they appeal to motives that he ignored; offer inducements that he utterly denied; these planned as men plan in all they did. What Pascal says, in effect, in comparing Christ and Mohammed, we may say of Christ and any other founder of a religion: “If Mohammed took the way of succeeding, according to human calculations, Jesus Christ took the way of perishing, according to human calculations.”