[1000 silverlings]

The Catholic Church has taught you that Mary is the Queen of Heaven, although there is no biblical evidence to support the idea that this is so. In fact, the term is not Christian and is not a compliment to Mary.

Therefore you read about an adorned woman, (and many times in the OT and in prophecy, Israel is referred to as a "woman")and so you conclude that the woman is Mary. The rest of the passage provides evidence that the woman is in fact Israel, but your indoctrination and subjective bias sees something else. Again, this is serious as it leads down the road to gross error.

[Petronski]

The Catholic Church has taught you that Mary is the Queen of Heaven, although there is no biblical evidence to support the idea that this is so.

There is no Biblical evidence to support sola Scriptura.

In fact, the term is not Christian and is not a compliment to Mary.

Queen of Heaven is not a compliment? Just because the title as falsely ascribed to some fictional moldy pagan goddess?

Amazing.

[annalex]

you read about an adorned woman [...] and so you conclude that the woman is Mary

I conclude that the woman in Mary because in verse 5 she is giving physical birth to a son, and in verse 10 the Son is identified as Christ. That is why I conclude that she is Mary, quite regardless of who else happens to be called "woman", and certainly regardless of whether she happens to be adorned.

Did I not make that connection, to the verses 5 and 10 in particular, clear before?

Now, the woman is also adorned with a crown and other signs of sanctity and majesty. So "Queen" kind of summarizes it. Again, were you to read the scripture honestly for what it says, this would be a good moment to critically reassess the Protestant counterscriptural dogma that Mary cannon possibly be seen as Queen, bedcause this is how she is described by St. John, her adopted son, in the scripture you hold to be the single rule of your faith.