“... Finally, Schrage’s use of textual evidence from the Coptic versions of the New Testament presents a serious methodological problem. Even if Thomas’ text should occasionally betray some dependence on other Coptic versions of the same saying, this fact would tell us something only about influences on the Coptic version of Thomas. It certainly provides no information about the sources of Thomas, which was clearly composed in Greek. For example, GThom 55 and 101 in Coptic read literally, “be a disciple to me”; Matthew and Luke both have the Greek genitive “my,” but the Sahidic New Testament passages read the same “to me” as Thomas. For Schrage the agreement with the Sahidic New Testament proves a dependence of Thomas on the New Testament, but surely at the most it shows only that the Coptic translation of Thomas may have been influenced by the Sahidic New Testament, or that the Coptic translation of Thomas may have influenced the Sahidic translators of the New Testament. ...”