I'll need to read this later, but I get nervous when anyone supports the Byzantine Text, because while it contains MORE manuscripts, all that proves is that it was copied more. The Alexandrian text, while containing some errors, are at least earlier -- and then textual critics check it against other early church writings and heresies (i.e. Adoptionism -- some manuscripts saying Yehoshua was "begot" at His baptism).

Its a very precise science. The errors are largely errors of bias, unfortunately, but I think this is one of those incidents where Christianity's history is important.

I am still of two minds about this issue though I have tended to gravitate towards the TR's. The argument is offered by the TR-protagonists that the only reason the Alexandrian texts are earlier was because there was a deliberate attempt to suppress the TR resulting in their destruction, leaving only a few early copies from which all the later multiple copies were made. I have always wondered about the evidence for that.