It isn't a new finding that the Bible states very clearly that God's son was the first creation. A careful reading of Colossians 1:15, 16 using the phrase πρωτότοκος πάσης κτίσεως as "firstborn of all creation" along with surrounding context, is most often completely ignored. But that first chapter of Colossians is also hotly debated when raised in connection with trinitarian credo that holds the son as the same as God in being without beginning, co-eternal. The KJV attempts to resolve it by translating the word "creature" from κτίσεως instead of the broader "creation" (as "construction" similar to Heb 3:4 κατασκευάζεται and κατασκευάσας regarding creation by God θεός).

There are many approaches to reading and studying the Bible, including allegorical. To take the entire Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek library with any single approach will likely produce challenges with comprehension. Historical, literary, moral, feminist, comparative, and many more approaches are open, and none are necessarily inappropriate or invalid. Still, any specific approach won't alter what's there.

But particularly, the canonical approach is appropriate for examining the connection of "what's there" in any single manuscript, fragment, text, or even one word or punctuation mark to the whole of it. That is the reason for the differentiation between canonical, apocryphal, and spurious.

This "new" discovery will no doubt take time to sort through as additional copies are discovered and the content is contextualized. There may be a perfectly good reason it was relegated to the binding as if it were scrap.