Why god cannot heal amputees? Well... he did, once.

[TheBigOhMan]

Note that the testimony is all given after two years of knowing Pellicer as a beggar. (I've read part of the testimony, but not that which you excerpted referring to the doctors observing the amputation itself; I don't read Spanish and I lack a machine readable copy to use for translation.)

Indeed. The testimony of the three doctors and pretty much everyone else is given a few months after Pellicer left the city and two years after his leg was cutted ( or suposedly cutted ).

But they did not operate themselves, the work was done by their assistants ("mancebos").

It's true they in fact used mancebos, but from the declaration of Dr. Diego Millaruelo, (Master of surgeons ) he explicity mentions he was present and helped to cut the leg.

for the article 11 after beeing read he said: That after made the deliberation from above, they cut the leg. And he knows this because he was present when they were cutting it, and he helped with this, and he saw it cut, and he claims this to be true per juramentum.

Estanga also seems to helped with cutting the leg ( he put "I cut the leg" in many ocassion in his declaration ).

Those also declared, with Juan Lorenzo García, the one who later buried the leg confirming the history. The leg was, by the way, buried in a communal grave, so it makes sense that it was never recovered.

This is the account of Juan Lorenzo Garcia concerning the destiny of the said leg (page 50 ).

"About the 12 article he responded and said: That he took the leg after it was cut and he move it with a companion of him, and after having it in they chapel the moved it to bury in in the Cementary of said Saint Hospital. And in fact they buried it, making a hole the size of a palm of profound, and he claimed this to be true per juramentum."

His declaration is not too long in fact. It must be however stated that he wasn't quite sure he was in fact the same dude of the leg, he usually claims that " it seems to me " he was the same. He declared he didn't knew his name and he had little comunication with him after the event, so we can't quite say it was the same leg and the same guy. However, it doesn't seem they buried the legs in a common grave ( they made holes in the cementary, aparently. My view of a common grave is a big hole where you put every sort of organs, legs, and bodies ).

The weak point of this testimonies is that they also declared that they got to know Pellicer after the fact, when he was a famous one legged beggar, and could not be totally sure he was the amputee.

Dr. Diego Millaruego claimed " That he knows well the said Miguel Juan Pellicero, for what he is going to say down, and with this he say that about 2 years ago, more or less, that he was with the Licenciated Juan de Estanga." and Dr. Juan de Estanga said "he remember the Juan Pellicero named in the article, who he know well, and that he is the same that they brough him".

The doctor [ Juan de Estanga ] seems to have seen the beggar from time to time, but he was not allowed to touch the scar. It is not implausible that Pellicer was faking it, with the weakened leg hidden behind his body.

He could indeed have (somehow) fooled the doctors and the mancebos somehow. Yet, Dr. Juan de Estanga claimed this:

To the 14 articule he claimed: that many days after in diferent ocasiones the said Juan Pellicero came to said Hospital for subsequent cures, and he took the protections of the leg, and that he ( Pellicero ) said to him that he put oil in the leg from the Virgin of del Pilar lamps..."

So it seems Pellicer leg was exposed when Dr. Juan de Estanga checked it. Don't know if he was allowed to touch the scar though ( there are many claims that he got one there, but that wouldn't be strange if he had his leg broken and infected up to a point ), though I don't know how he could have fooled Juan de Estanga with his leg without clothes.

Would be a bit strange he couldn't touch it though. There are some declarations that claim they touched the leg, and even touch it and see the scar naked.

Poor man.

[little_monkey]

I was interested until I saw the date 1637. No cameras, no living eyewitnesses = didn't happen.

What's stranger is that it happened only once. God must have decided, "I'm going to do this once. No cameras? Tough luck. I ain't doing this again... "

I'm not sure how that would sound in Spanish.

Google translation: "Voy a hacer esto una vez. ¿No hay cámaras? Mala suerte. No hacerlo otra vez... ''

[smax]

With God, it's always wild speculation about what he did or what he can do.

With science, we see it with our own eyes and there is no doubt.

Science has done many of the types of things the bible claims but cannot substantiate. Science has:

Given the blind sight
Given the deaf hearing
Enabled the criple to walk
Replaced vital organs
Cured diseases

And the list goes on and on.

While religious people pray for a miracle, men of science put in the hard work necessary to produce one.

[Ryantology]

It's 1637. The Thirty Years' War was in full flame. It's awfully nice of God to take time away from his busy schedule of watching his followers kill each other and virtually wreck continental Europe over which group God liked in the correct manner, to heal one guy's leg. Truly, his wisdom knows no bounds.

[Walking Void]

While religious people pray for a miracle, men of science put in the hard work necessary to produce one.

I am confused as to how religious people have the attention span to go on the same old trip for their entire lives between generations and generations of people. I mean, should they not have expected any results by now?

[little_monkey]

It's 1637. The Thirty Years' War was in full flame. It's awfully nice of God to take time away from his busy schedule of watching his followers kill each other and virtually wreck continental Europe over which group God liked in the correct manner, to heal one guy's leg. Truly, his wisdom knows no bounds.

That you believe God can't take a break is blasphemously offensive!

[John V]

I am confused as to how religious people have the attention span to go on the same old trip for their entire lives between generations and generations of people. I mean, should they not have expected any results by now?

No. Think it through. If amputees were healed regularly, it would no longer be considered miraculous.

[Faith No More]

No. Think it through. If amputees were healed regularly, it would no longer be considered miraculous.

Not true. A miracle by definition is a phenomenon that violates natural law. It could happen every five minutes and that wouldn't stop it from being a miracle. Sure, it would lose its wow factor, but that wouldn't mean its not miraculous.

[Minimalist]

I am confused as to how religious people have the attention span to go on the same old trip for their entire lives between generations and generations of people. I mean, should they not have expected any results by now?

No. Think it through. If amputees were healed regularly, it would no longer be considered miraculous.

Once would be nice. Surely, your "god" could manage that?

[John V]

Not true. A miracle by definition is a phenomenon that violates natural law. It could happen every five minutes and that wouldn't stop it from being a miracle. Sure, it would lose its wow factor, but that wouldn't mean its not miraculous.

If it happens all the time, you wouldn't think of it as violating natural law in the first place.