The real problem here is the assertion that “more than eighty” gospels were considered for the New Testament.  The fact that dozens[1] of gospels in addition to the four canonical texts were written does not mean that all or even most of them were ever serious candidates for the New Testament.   The “New Testament” refers to the collection of sacred writings of a particular group of Christians (a group scholars often refer to as “proto-Orthodox”), and within this group there was never any serious consideration given to any other gospels besides Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.  Other gospels may have been mentioned in the conversations held by those who helped form the proto-Orthodox canon, but the mention was almost always derisive.  Many derogatory comments (words like “spurious” and “false”) were lobbed at the gospels of Thomas, Matthias, Basilides, and the Egyptians by writers like Origen, Irenaeus, and Eusebius.