Posts

List Of Muslim battles and conquests from the beginning

Image
 Related https://peacebyjesusdotnet.blogspot.com/2026/04/major-militant-actions-against-israel.html Below is a chronological list of major Muslim conquests battles from the earliest period of Islam, focusing on the most significant engagements during the time of Muhammad and the Rashidun Caliphate (the first four caliphs after Muhammad). This list draws from recognized historical sources and compilations of early Islamic military history wikipedia +2 . Major Muslim Conquests Battles (Early Period) Year Battle Name Description / Location Key Participants 624 Battle of Badr Muhammad’s first major victory against the Quraysh of Mecca. Fought near Badr, Arabia. Muslims vs. Meccan Quraysh 625 Battle of Uhud Meccan Quraysh attacked the Muslims near Mount Uhud, outside Medina. Muslims vs. Meccan Quraysh 627 Battle of the Trench (Khandaq) Meccan coalition laid siege to Medina; Muslims dug a trench for defense. Muslims vs. Meccan coalition 630 Conquest of Mecca Muhammad led a large Muslim ...

Why do modern dental fillings fallout, unlike the past?

  Modern fillings don’t intrinsically “fall out more” than in the past; what has changed is the material , the technique sensitivity , and often patient risk factors , so failures are more noticeable and sometimes more frequent in certain situations. loudfamilydentistry +1 Material change: amalgam vs. composite Older fillings were usually amalgam (silver/mercury), which is mechanically packed into a cavity shaped with undercuts; it’s relatively forgiving of moisture and technique and often lasts decades. pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih +1 Modern fillings are often tooth‑colored composites bonded to enamel/dentin; they are more aesthetic but more technique‑sensitive (they need a very dry field, careful layering, and proper curing) and have somewhat higher rates of secondary decay and fracture, especially in large posterior restorations. loudfamilydentistry +1 Main reasons modern fillings fail or fall out Secondary caries under/around the filling : Recurrent decay is the leading cause of failure...

Differences between Lutheran belief in real presence and Catholicism...

  See here ( https://peacebyjesus.net/the_lord%27s_supper.html ) on the metaphysical contrivance Romans Catholicism came up with (since her priests cannot confext what a purely literal reading of "this is my body" would mean). And I actually read the term "Real Presence" came from Anglicans..  Both Catholics and confessional Lutherans affirm that Christ is truly, substantially present in the Lord’s Supper—not merely symbolically—but they sharply disagree on how He is present and what happens to the bread and wine. 1. What they agree on Christ’s true body and blood are present in the Supper and are truly given to all communicants (believers and unbelievers) who receive the sacrament. This is not a mere “memorial” or psychological presence; it is an objective presence grounded in Christ’s words, “This is my body… this is my blood.” 2. Catholic doctrine: transubstantiation The entire substance of bread and wine is changed into the substance of Christ’s body...