“... Hence, though it is certainly possible that Gos. Thom. 44 used Matthew, the evidence is far from clear that it did so. Given the lack of compelling evidence for literary dependence, we will tentatively conclude that logion 44 preserves an independent line of tradition. This is not to say that Gos. Thom. 44 does not show clear signs of redaction—indeed it does on two counts. 1) The shift from “Son of Man” to “the Son” is a transition that is probably indicative of the early church’s preference for “Son” or “Son of God” over “Son of Man” as a title for Jesus. 2) Similarly, the addition of granting forgiveness for speaking against the “Father” as well as the Son follows the developing trend within the early church to speak of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit together. Relationship to the Gospels, context, and meaning of Didache 11:7: Unlike Q 12:10, Mark 3:28-29, and Gos. Thom. 44, Did. 11:7 is not styled as a saying of Jesus. Nor does its wording or structure line up particularly well with the other occurrences. Nevertheless, its many points of overlap with our saying make it extremely likely that some organic connection did exist. The precise nature of this connection is now impossible to determine with any certainty. 1) Did. 11:7 might be an interpretation of the literary text of either Mark or Matt, both of which contain all of the elements which are found in Did. 11:7. 2) Did. 11:7 might reflect the author’s recollection and corresponding application of the Markan or Matthean version of the saying. 3) Finally, Did. 11:7 might be based on an independent reminiscence of a saying of the historical Jesus. The lack of Markan or Matthean order or exact verbal parallels render it impossible to establish literary dependence. In any case, Did. 11:7 shows clear traces of development. Its context and substance both reveal that it has evolved to meet the needs of the early church. Verse 11:7 is located in the midst of a series of instructions about how to treat the apostles and prophets of the early church (11:3-13:7). 11:7 threatens disastrous consequences for anyone who tests or evaluates a prophet speaking in the Spirit. This sin will not be forgiven. Hence, it would appear that Did. 11:7 interprets speaking against the Holy Spirit as speaking against the Christian prophet, who is empowered by the Spirit. This specific application of the saying surely originated in the post-Easter period, and reflects the needs and concerns of the early church rather than the historical Jesus. ...”