One of the things that got me thinking along these lines was learning about the discovery at
Nag Hammadi of an ancient library (
links to the texts) thought to be the a collection of religious writings that was in circulation perhaps a century or so after Jesus' death.
Since the New Testament was (and here I am happy to be proved wrong, since I am in no way an authority on the matter) put together and distributed with the backing of Rome (Empr. Constantine? 325AD?) of course, their versions of the bible(which of course make great pains to explain the importance and authority of the [Roman] Church - see the Gospel of John, which is the most authoritarian gospel of the chosen) became more widely accepted since a) they were more readily available, and b) followers of other non-accepted materials were branded as heretics and driven from their homes, their books burnt and their families put to death.
The documents found in the library paint a very different picture of Jesus and his teachings, and one that is much less likely to have been distorted by politics and power (since it's been buried for the last 1700 years) Of course, it is unknown as to the authenticity of the find, though pieces found here appear to correspond to fragments and full works found elsewhere. This find apparently is just the most complete. (Side note of interest: One of the books found in the library is a translation of Plato's Republic)
How should (or even how does, since again I'm asking these questions without having done a great deal of research) a church respond to findings such as these? Does it make any difference? Should anyone be interested? Does it have anything to teach us? Can we use it to improve ourselves somehow?