A good introduction to Reformed presuppositional New Testament text criticism. This is E. F. Hills' follow up book to his "The King James Version Defended".
I am conflicted by this book. There are aspects with which I heartily agree and those with which I strongly disagree. His basic premise is that there are only two ways to approach science, philosophy and the study of the Bible--the "believing" approach that acknowledges at the outset that their is a God and seeks to conform and submit to his teachings, and an unbelieving approach that denies God at the outset. I agree with Hill that any attempt to be "neutral" is in fact a concession of the major point of debate--the reality of God and his self-revelation in Scripture and nature.
That said, the author equates God's promise that "his Word will never pass away" with the textual superiority of the Textus Receptus (including additions from the Vulgate made with no manuscript evidence!). While believing the promise and with utter confidence in the integrity of the Biblical text, I find his arguments for TR preference convincing. He is spot on in his criticism of utter reliance on other text families. Approaching each variant separately and evaluating the weight of all textual evidence seems a better approach.