NT cannonical expansion

I am writing a book that attempts to systematically argue that the NT must  
be expanded to included material from recent discoveries such as the Gospel 
of Thomas. I am particularly 
intrested in any comments on this idea so that I can polish my position. In  
particular I am intrested in anyone who feels that they can defend the four  
gospel structure established by Irenaeus. I have found in the Bible no  
scripture indicating that the NT should be limited to four gospels  
and 27 books; nor have I found a way to justifiy such a limit. The limit  
imposed by Irenaeus comes from the late second century and is a part of the  
Orthodox/vatican tradition, but not a part of the tradition of the earliest  
Church or those who were condemned as heretics. Ireneaus's attempt to 
justifiy this structure on the basis of  
numerology rooted in the book of Revelations is feable (however it held  
sway within the tradtion he asserted) . Numerological attempts using the  
book of Revelations should point to the number seven, not four. In addition  
the best numerological calculations should suround the number one (i.e  
Q or the Diatesseron) or three (the trinity) seven (Revalations), or twelve 
(the apostles). Ultimately there is no  
specific number that can be used as the guide for determining the amount of  
gospels or books in the NT. Those who feel that even insinuating Biblical  
revision is satanic, should take into consideration that the Protestant  
reformation resulted in the removal of LXX material from the OT to produce  
the 66 book canon used by Protestants. While some such as the Anglican  
Church simply marginalize the material into apocryphal status (a word that  
carries a stigma in theological circles but rarely in historical ones).  
Who has any thoughts of the issue? I am intrested in comments for or 
particularly in favor. I have already met with criticism for even mentioning  
the subject. Has anyone ever considerd the possibility that the early  
orthodoxy excluded material that should have been admited? I have never read  
any literature that even tried to address the possiblity, thew most I have  
seen is a paragraph or two that dismisses the idea as silly, or worse yet as 
incompatible with "tradition" (take note that the tradition of the four 
gospel structure is Ireneaus's not God's). Has anyone ever  
read an argument seeking to justify the expansion of the Bible, if so please  
inform me of it I have looked very hard. In addition any one who can give  
scriptural refrence that indicated a four gospel 27 book structure please  
enlighten me.