Please do not respond without addressing my agrument.
Ah yes! St John of Damascus! Born nearly 600 years after John wrote Revelation and might I say nearly 600 years after all the Apostles had died. Wasn’t in 413 that the your so called “church” declared Mary to be “mother of God” and starting this whole “queen of heaven” myth to placate the “queen of heaven” worshipers in Ephesus?
I say all that to say this. I couldn’t care less what your St. John of Damascus thought or said. If the death and fictional bodily assumption of Mary had been as important as it is held by the RCC today they would not have neglected to write about it. That “bodily assumption” would have been paramount to the gospel as taught by the Apostles. The lack of even a mention of Mary by any Apostle after Jesus ascended into heaven says volumes. The bodily assumption of Mary is a myth that grew out of years and years of going astray from the pure gospel of Jesus as told by Him and His Apostles.
There is argument to address.. what we have heard is a tradition of men with no foundation.. something that MIGHT have been said about something he had no proof happened ...
Whereas there is no proof in scripture or in CONTEMPORARY history to its truth.
Paul would not have been a Catholic