Seeing christainity being used to justify hatred against the LGBT community, mind you by people who just last week were swearing that they are pagans and Armenians should return to paganism, is both factually incorrect and just simply hilarious to see.

I have recommended to other Christians to go actually read our scripture, our bible and specifically about the cultural revisionism which has occurred in these books. Revisionism to them has resulted in changing entire meanings, most specifically in relation to homosexuality.

Where the original books had referred to adultery, prostitution, rape, etc. the books were revised, most powerfully in Europe, over two thousands years to target homosexuality. They only see what they want to see and twist the words to their narrative, which is a sin: fyi.

Deuteronomy 4:2 You shall not add to the word, nor take away from it, that you may keep the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you.

Deuteronomy 12:32 Whatever I command you, you shall be careful to do; you shall not add to nor take away from it.

Revelation 22:18 I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues which are written in this book.

So what does this mean? It means revisionism is a sin. Then why have our books been changed?

One common argument given by religious scholars is that the affect of Western European cultural shaming on Eastern traditions, in this case the tradition of adelphopoiesis, resulted in suppression and cultural amnesia regarding the meaning of same-sex relationships.

What is adelphopoiesis (brother-making)? it is a church recognized same-sex union, usually between males and occasionally between females. These rituals occurred in the Catholic Church up to the 14th century and in the Eastern Orthodox Churches up to the 20th century.

This ritual was documented well in Byzantine manuscripts: The ceremony started off with prayers and litanies celebrating earlier examples of same-sex couples or friends in the early Church. The couple are then girded with a single belt, signifying their union as one.

They place a hand on the Gospel as they receive lit candles. The priest then reads from one of Paul's epistles (1st Corinthians) and the Gospel (John). After more prayers, litanies, the Lord's Prayer, and Holy Communion while the couple holding the hand of the other.

Finally, the couple exchange a kiss and service concludes with singing of Psalm 133:1 (Behold how good and sweet it is for brothers to live as one.. the Lord bestows his blessing, even life forevermore) Sound familiar? It is nearly identical to the heterosexual marriage ceremony.

There are differences but in both rituals, the priest wished that God would grant them a 'mutual love without offense' and the couple was bound 'not only by nature but also by their spirit.' When forming these 'brotherly' relationships, they would be united as one.

Legally, everything they possess would become shared between them. In the Roman secular law code, however, men who were already in heterosexual marriages were forbidden from carrying out brother making rituals, as the wife or children cannot be shared.

Such relationships were not just exclusive to the East. In the Latin Catholic Rite of Slovenia, there existed a ceremony entitled 'Ordo ad fratres faciendum' literally "Order for the making of brothers." While in France the ceremony of affrèrement had existed.

Such relationships were not just exclusive to the East. In the Latin Catholic Rite of Slovenia, there existed a ceremony entitled 'Ordo ad fratres faciendum' literally "Order for the making of brothers." While in France the ceremony of affrèrement had existed.

Given that the most archetypal human couple, Joseph and Mary, never consummated their relationship, marriage in Christian tradition became associated with consent and mutual love between the couple rather than carnal copulation which was the same in relation to adelphopoiesis.

Early Christian thinkers, specifically Saint Augustine, argued that a Christian marriage, where the couple refrained from sexual contact, would render them stronger, more loving and harmonious. Spouses in marriage need not have or have ever intended to sleep with their partner.

Augustine also suggested that Christians could also seek to fulfill his or her sexual desires in marriage. They would remain married whether or not they had children and whether or not they had sexual relations. Such relationships became known as spiritual marriages.

The Brother-making ceremony also mentioned pairs of saints which historically have been considered to be lovers such as Saints Sarkis and Bakhos, Saints Cosmas and Damian, Saints Cyrus and John, Saints Polyeuktos and Nearchos, Saints Perpetua and Felicity to name a few.

I wont be talking about all of them but will speak about a few. The most famous of the pairs, Sarkis and Bakhos (Sergius and Bacchus), which are highly venerated in Armenian Church. They were Roman soldiers of high standing and were close to the Emperor.

Contemporary Christian author Tertullian described their relationship in the same way Christian heterosexual marriage was described. When the Emperor requested they sacrifice to pagan idols, ie. renounce Christianity, they refused. They were then subsequently arrested.

They were paraded through the streets in women’s clothing. Early accounts say that they responded by chanting that they were dressed as brides of Christ. They told their captors that women’s dress never stopped women from worshiping Christ, so it wouldn’t stop them, either.

Before continuing it is important to recognize that in Christianity, Gender roles are rejected and the very existence of Gender is rejected. Galatians 3:28 There is neither male and female for you are all one in Christ Jesus. At Judgement day, we are all the same under God.

In the emperor's letters, he recalled they 'chanted together and prayed as if with one mouth.' Infuriated, the emperor demanded Bakhos be flogged to death. Sarkis was then returned to jail. Bakhos' remains were not buried but were thrown to dogs and beasts.

In Coptic tradition, the body of Bakhos was protected (commanded through divine providence) by an eagle and a lion. An angel appeared to two holy men, described as 'brothers', who led them to the body of Bakhos. The holy men took the body and buried it near their cave.

Sarkis, depressed and heartsick, cried out "No Longer brother will we chant together 'Behold how good and pleasant it is for brothers to abide in oneness!' You have been unyoked from me and gone up to heaven, leaving me alone on earth, now single and without comfort."

Bakhos' statement to Sarkis is unique in the Christian history of martyrdom. Usually the promised reward is union with God, not with a lover. Moreover, the oldest record of their martyrdom described them as 'erastai' which is a Greek word referring to lovers.

Another pair of Sanctified martyrs, Polyeuktos and Nearchos, from the Armenian city of Malatya in 259AD were described as brothers, not by birth, but by affection. Their relationship was much stronger than blood and each believed he lived and breathed wholly in the other’s body.

Nearchos was Christian while Polyeuktos was not, both were members of the military. Polyeuktos also had a wife. Officials in Malatya looked to enforce a general persecution of Christians. Those who would sacrifice to pagan idols would be promoted while Christians are beheaded.

When Nearchos learned of this and presented his worries of “losing the unity of his soul” with Polyeuktos, Polyeuktos replied “even if we were to be separated by death, no one would be able to diminish the devotion and love we have for each other.” After, Polyeuktos converted.

They saw themselves as one soul and disposition. Polyeuktos asked Nearchos to remember their secret pledge and devotion to each other. Polyeuktos died being convinced that he would enter heaven and be perpetually joined with Nearchos, but not his wife.

In early stories, Polyeuktos had no concern for his wife stating “neither wife nor children nor terrestrial wealth nor human rank” could persuade him from worshiping pagan gods. Later revisionism tried portraying a love Triangle between Polyeuktos, his wife and Nearchos.

As I said before, in cases where scripture allegedly condemns homosexuality the true condemnation is focused on something other than homosexual acts but due to revisionism over time, homosexuality became the target.

For example, Romans 1:26-27 never condemned homosexual acts but rather homosexual acts committed by heterosexuals. The homosexual act in particular was reference to the practice of temple prostitution which was condemned in a similar manner in 1 Kings 15:12, 2 Kings 23:7.

The argument that Paul in Romans 1:26-27 condemned homosexuality as “unnatural” also has no basis as the “goes against nature” argument against homosexuality did not exist before the Enlightment Era.

In other parts of the bible, Corinthians 6:9-10 and Timothy 1:9-10, the Greek word ἀρσενοκοίτης was used and has been translated as ‘homosexual.' However, its connotation is related to temple prostitution and other forms of sexual economic exploitation.

ἀρσενοκοίτης most likely means a pimp considering it appears next to kidnappers quite often. While Greeks were aware of sexual preference, the Greek language in antiquity had no nouns corresponding to homosexuality or heterosexuality.

If the texts of Corinthians, Timothy and Romans are the only basis for condemnation of homosexuality, then it sits on a weak foundation. Take-away here is very simple. Don’t use Christianity to justify your hate and actually take time to read what you say you believe in.

Also, how can Armenians say they love their people while also excluding an entire category of Armenians?