The following is a continuation of the letter of part 1.
Not only is muscle testing an occult technique, it is scientifically impossible. It does not follow the Biblical model of subduing and having dominion over the earth by investigating created processes through the scientific method (Genesis 1:28). It fails the Biblical imperatives to “Prove all things; hold fast that which is good” (1 Thessalonians 5:21), to “keep sound wisdom and discretion” (Proverbs 3:21), to consider what is “true . . . honest . . .[and] just” (Philippians 4:8), to “reason” (Isaiah 1:18; 1 Samuel 12:7; cf. Acts 17:2; 24:25; etc.), to “see, and know, and consider, and understand” (Isaiah 41:20), to “produce [a] cause . . . [and] bring forth . . . strong reasons” (Isaiah 41:21), to “gird up the loins of [our] mind . . . as obedient children” (2 Peter 1:13-14) to have a “sound mind” (2 Timothy 1:7), to “be not children in understanding . . . but in understanding be men” (1 Corinthians 14:20), to “prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God” by “the renewing of [one’s] mind” (Romans 12:1-2) and based on reasoning be “persuaded” (Acts 18:4). There is no scientific, rational mechanism that can explain how moving one’s arm can indicate problems in muscles in other parts of the body. There is no scientific, rational mechanism that can explain how these alleged muscle problems can cause all kinds of other diseases, as muscle testing claims. There is no scientific, rational mechanism that can justify the “Neuro-Emotional Technique” idea that emotions are stored in an organ, such as the pancreas, liver, kidneys, etc. for decades, and that these emotions stored in one’s liver or some other organ can cause disease. (Fox stated that Judy had stored emotions in one of her organs that had been hurting her health since she was twelve years old—and that then, by tapping on her back in one place, the locked up emotions were released and she was now made healthy again!) One does not even have the same cells in most of one’s organs that one had two decades ago—they are all long gone. There is no scientific, rational method whereby eating parts of various cow innards and related products sold by the Standard Processing company can “rebalance” my non-testable, non-verifiable chi, as the NET materials in Fox’s office claims. There is no scientific, rational method that can explain how Chiropractor Fox can “test” my arm—as he did when I was there—as long as I am holding on to Judy, to figure out what nutrients Judy’s body is missing. There is no scientific, rational mechanism that can explain how, when Chiropractor Fox or anyone else employing muscle testing, pronounces the words “one” or “two” or “three,” one’s arm muscles will somehow hear and respond to those words in the English language and will either stay firm or relax, and that this will enable one to know whether or not one needs to take, one, two, three, etc. pills in a bottle that one is holding. There is no scientific, rational mechanism that can explain how when someone says the words “two weeks,” “four weeks,” “six weeks,” etc. and then moves someone else’s arm, that the English words pronounced will change anything at all in the arm muscles, much less be able to predict the state of one’s body in two, four, six, fourteen, etc. weeks. How can pushing on Judy’s arm while pronouncing different words possibly determine what is going to happen with any of her organs whatsoever, unless one’s intestines, liver, etc. can hear, speak, and understand English and can themselves predict the future? When Chiropractor Fox said the words “fourteen weeks,” moved Judy’s arm, and then said that she needed to come back in fourteen weeks because that was how long his treatment would keep working, he was doing something in the realm of predictive prophecy, not something that is in any way possible scientifically, so unless we are going to say that the New Testament gift of predictive prophecy has not ceased with the completion of the canon of Scripture (contra 1 Corinthians 13), but it is now given to those who are not even born again, his method of determining what will happen to Judy’s body in the future is impossible. This is why muscle testing fails when it is tested by the scientific method. Accepting muscle testing as true not only exposes Christians to occult influence, it also requires the abandonment of the Biblical commands to employ reason and logic, important elements of our creation in the image of God. Its explanations do not work in the realm of the Scriptural scientific method, but only on the false assumptions of Eastern paganism and the New Age, developed by the devil.
The exceedingly strange idea of NET that different emotions are related to our different organs has no scientific evidence in its favor whatsoever. For example, Chiropractor Fox’s wall chart stated that a pancreatic problem is associated with “low self-esteem.” A gallbladder problem is associated with “resentment” (and his chart further indicates that this problem makes one “indecisiv” (sic)). If one is “dogmatically positioned,” the large intestine is the culprit. One notices that there are allegedly helpful remedies to these things from earth, metal, water, wood, fire, and “visceral polarity.” The chart indicates chiropractic “subluxations” (which do not exist, as will be discussed below) that are associated with these problems and remedies, as well as sounds, smells, and times of day for remedies. The muscle groups and spinal bones associated with these emotions are also listed. And, as mentioned before, the chart, at the bottom, claims a connection with chiropractor George Goodheart (who, as we have learned, developed its contents with occult means) as well as chiropractors Victor Frank and Robert Ridler.
One who wishes for further information on muscle testing can examine Ankerberg and Weldon’s book Can You Trust Your Doctor? cited earlier, the work by the Christian Medical Association, Alternative Medicine: The Christian Handbook by Donald O’Mathuna & Walt Larimore, the articles analyzing muscle-testing Biblically and scientifically on the Internet by conservative evangelical Christians at http://www.ccgm.org.au/Articles/ARTICLE-0002.htm; http://www.cinam.net/AK.html, & http://www.watchman.org/na/namedak.htm, and the sound scientific material—promoted in the Christian Medical Association work listed above for doing research into unconventional therapies—at http://www.quackwatch.org (cf. the article “Applied Kinesiology: Muscle-Testing for ‘Allergies’ and ‘Nutrient Deficiencies’ at http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/Tests/ak.html).
A second severe problem with the practice of Chiropractor Fox is his endorsement, following NET, of homeopathy. On the wall of his office, a “home-run” chart to health is listed with four bases, one of which is to employ homeopathic remedies. Homeopathy was developed by Samuel Hahnemann, who “was a follower of the powerful spiritist and medium Emanuel Swedenborg . . . [and] was steeped in the mysticism of Swedenborg . . . Hahnemann was also a Freemason . . . One of his biographers writes . . . [‘]He took offense at . . . Jesus of Nazareth[’] . . . was an admirer of the occultists Paracelsus and Mesmer . . . [who employed practices] often indistinguishable from modern forms of psychic healing . . . [was] also influenced by animism and Eastern religion. . . . Finally, Hahnemann himself claimed to be ‘inspired’ in his homeopathic writings . . . there is little doubt that Hahnemann . . . was ultimately inspired by the spirit world. . . . The occult influence in homeopathy is transmitted to the individual, bringing him consciously or unconsciously under demonic influence.” Homeopathy is thus spiritually dangerous and entirely inappropriate for God’s people.
Homeopathy is also scientifically impossible. This is why it is an abysmal failure when tested by the scientific method, and why homeopaths themselves who have attempted to prove their system scientifically have ended up renouncing homeopathy. Homeopathy involves diluting solutions containing a particular “treatment” to such an extent that there is often not even a single molecule of the “treatment” left in the remedy. When one creates a homeopathic remedy, one takes one drop of the alleged cure, say, for example, arsenic (which is, of course, a deadly poison, not a cure, but this is what someone we know was told to take upon going to a homeopath!). One drop of arsenic is mixed with a large quantity of water (dilution 1x). One drop from this mixture is then taken and mixed with another equally large quantity of water (dilution 2x). One drop from this mixture is then taken and mixed with a third equally large quantity of water (3x). This process is repeated until the substance is diluted to some fantastic proportion, such as 30x (the amount mentioned on the NET website, http://www.netmindbody.com/patients/homeopathic-support.asp). The problem is that at this dilution, there is not even a single molecule of the original “treatment” left—one is consuming nothing but very expensive water! (Of course, if the “treatment” is a poison such as arsenic, that is actually a good thing!) One who does the mathematics will discover that amount of water mixed with the original “treatment” in a 30X solution is more dilute than what one would get if he put a drop of a substance in the Pacific Ocean, and then told someone to drink a random glass of water from the Pacific to get cured by the drop mixed in the ocean—the likelihood is statistically almost 100% that there would not be even a single molecule from the dropper in the glass of water from the Pacific! Homeopathy is demonic in its origin and practice and is scientifically impossible. Its connection to Chiropractor Fox is a second reason, in addition to muscle testing, why Christians should not in any way participate with his practice.
 “Standard Process products have been promoted with preposterous claims for more than 40 years . . . the company and its founder [have been] prosecuted for criminal misbranding” (“The Shady History of Royal Lee and Standard Process Laboratories,” Stephen Barrett, http://www.quackwatch.org/11Ind/lee.html).
 For example, the Journal of the American Dietetic Association for June 1988 contained an article by James J. Kennedy, et. al., entitled “Applied Kinesiology Unreliable for Assessing Nutrient Status.” Utilizing provable methods such as placebos, retesting, and a computerized dynameter to actually measure muscle strength, the diagnoses obtained by applied kinesiology were found to be no better than random guessing.
 Pgs. 315-319, Can You Trust Your Doctor? ibid.
 cf. pgs. 263-314, Can You Trust Your Doctor? ibid.