It would be interesting if the GB were to actually cite which non-canon writings of early Christianity they had consulted in order to try and emulate early Christianity. Because it really is relying on an ex cathedra pronouncement of what constitutes the 'inspired word' to use just the NT in order to try and re-create original beliefs. Surely if the early christian church found something worth reading, it should be included in the canon of anyone seeking to recreate their beliefs? But of course that can't happen because it leads to awkward questions which have even fewer answers in JWland. There's only so many references to Cedar Point, Ohio the Bible could contain after all...
The idea of 'one truth' came up on Terry's interesting thread on Papias too. There is ample evidence for early Christianity not being one detailed doctrine which all held in common. There are clear hints of that even within the New Testament with the debate over circumcision, the disagreements between converts etc. There's some debate around passages in Luke and how they relate to Marcion's version of it, isn't there?
Personally, I do wonder whether many of the early Christians were waiting for Christ's return within the first couple of generations and it was the failure of that to happen which then led to the move to reading things less literally. So perhaps at least there one could identify similarities between JWs and the early Christian church... Vladimir and Estragon are very patient in their waiting too...