I don’t agree that that interpretation, because firstly, it is specifically referring to “this book of prophecy”. The Revelation is a book of prophecy, while the Bible in it’s entirety cannot be limited to that description. Occam’s razor, in this case, says we should assume it only refers to Revelation and not the less likely scenario.
Secondly, the punishment cited for disobedience mentions the curses contained in the same book. If the book that is referred to is Revelation, then what those curses are is immediately clear, while if the book is the Bible as a whole, then this clause becomes unspecific and, therefore, a much less concrete warning.
Finally, there is the reason I previously cited, that the New Testament wasn’t even a collected work at the time that verse was written, much less with Revelation in its traditional place as the final book in the collection. So, in order to make the warning refer to the Bible, you’d have to assume that the warning was prophetic in order to have it make any sense.
Basically, in all those circumstances, you have to do some logical gymnastics to justify the verse as applying to the Bible. If you don’t have that goal in mind, the plain reading is that it is just referring to Revelation itself.
Like I posted to elsie, then what about galatians 1:6 8 and 9 contains the exact same thing. You may be ticky tacky right about the verse being incorrect but the admonition is true and was laid down in both OT and NT. Are you just saying that revelations is incorrect for the premise or that the premise is wrong?