ode to original sin


My Ode against Original Sin


Tell you about Original Sin
Please stick it in the bin
Your not guilty from the day you were born
Organized religion needed you to adorn


You with weights they could only lift
To keep you in religions grip

In two hundred and fifty six ad
Long after Master Jesus’s Christianity


A college of cardinals was convened
Invented original sin for power over you and me
The beloved mother of mankind
Became the blamed for us to be blind


Those cardinals placed evil everywhere
And tagged it so they could be the answer
They needed to get us from the day born
To rack us with guilt and keep us scorned


To convince us we've sinned from an early age
Press ganged into the flock come what may

The true state of affairs is far different
You can fly higher without original guilt


You are not guilty of being not guilty
And this truth sets you free absolutely
Take all doctrine with a pinch of salt too
It’s all designed to maintain control over you

View dazthedruid's Full Portfolio
S74rw4rd's picture

May I suggest, with the

May I suggest, with the utmost respect, that you consult the fifth chapter of the Apostle Saint Paul's epistle to the Romans?  Or do you hold that as post-fabricated as well?  The great Russian Christian poet, Tyutchev, said (in F. Jude's English paraphrase, available on the internet). "You must believe what Saint Paul believed" in order to claim the call of a Christian.  


Again, I offer this with respect.  I am not seeking a debate, only to ask if you have considered what the great Apostle wrote about original sin and sin's origin.


DaztheDruid's picture

may i say, with little

may i say, with little respect for the book entitled Romans that it was written in 56ad by Rome itself as a prelude to what was a 'if you cant beat them join them' play. you see by 56ad Rome had killed over 12 million christians and the people were getting sick of the killing.


am i to believe a russian poet over source itself? i think not!


may i make a suggestion which will give you the truth? take a glass of water before bed. ask with your thoughts a question, for example 'is the book fo romans in the bible to be trusted?' do this for 5 mins, drink the water, go to bed and dream the answer.


yes i considered what the apostle supposedly said, but then i found out when the book was written so doubted it was the apostle that said anything at all. then i also factored in the fact that back in those days Rome controlled virtually all the scribes, and i came to the conclusion 'original sin' was created as a tool for control of the masses. Rome hated Jesus with a passion, there was no reason that they would record his life in any detail at all.; none of the apostles could write a jot anyway.


and happy christmas to you, even though christmas was just a rebranded pagan midwinter holiday. Christianity stole loads off the pagans including christmas, easter, even the cross.


i admire in some respects you clutch a holy book, but blindly following it without a shred of doubt, theres a word for that 'indoctrinated' and its not healthy. try reading the gnostic gospels, more truth in the Book of Thomas than all of the New Testament.

S74rw4rd's picture

Thank you very much, I do

Thank you very much, I do appreciate the reply, although I find it wholly unconvincing.  However, that is why JUdgment Day will be so incredibly interesting, when the separation occurs and misinformation ends.  And I do not clutch at any book; no more than you clutch at your historical interprtations.  


DaztheDruid's picture

my information comes from

my information comes from akashic records whic is source itself, your source are the words of men written for control of the masses.


i have nothing to fear from a bogus, fear based judgment day, as i have nothing to fear from a whooly loving god; the fear based relgious propaganda was written to keep the flock in fear of retrubution.


Its all in the name reLIGion, the LIG comes from LIGature, to bind(spiritually)

S74rw4rd's picture

One last question, I promise

One last question, I promise not to follow up:  You seem to assert your beliefs as facts, like overzealous freshmen at college did when I was there, espeically with what seems to be a tendendcy to assert that whatever documents support your theses are, by definition, authentic and and authoritative; and those documents, like the Bible, that disprove your theses are forgeries made for political control.  (Same way with the common sense disproval of your assertion that all the Apostles were illiterate.  How do you know this?  Actually, your "all" fails because Matthew is at least on exception:  he was a tax collector before following Jesus, and would have been responsible to write many, and highly detailed, reports to be sent both to the tax farmers in Rome and to the local administrative authority, Herod Antipas, who was most likely literate and would have expected his administrative staff to be literate as well.  Or were these details forged as well?)


I promise that is my last question.


DaztheDruid's picture

i only speak with the same

i only speak with the same authority as you, though i do suppliment my view with logic, common sense and historical fact, all of which seem to be sadly lacking in the KJV.

I used to be a Sunday School teacher, i know my way round scripture. One of the earliest books of the new Testament was Romans, but the latest was revelation which was written in 220ad; one hell of a memory those scribes had.

Regardless of what Matthew did for a living, 2000 yrs ago there were less than 30,000 people that could write a jot ON THE ENTIRE PLANET! its one thing logging numbers but its another recording a life in such detail. 

Quite franky i dont trust any of the supposed Roman or Jewish history in the bible or any of the claims made today. For example, as far as Jesus being born in Bethlehem thats a joke cos he was an Edomite so his birthplace was more likely Amman in Jordan, and in the modern day I dont believe St Peter is buried in the Basilica at all, more likely in Jordan too as it happens.the ressurection story is all twaddle too, written many years after he supposedly died.

Rome hijacked Christianity in a 'if you cant beat them join them' play, after all they killed over 21 million christians so they were bound to realize they couldnt beat it. And Jewry have stolen loads from the Jesus story when it suited them, though they have never believed him to be the messiah, they could never admit that a black man was the messiah. even the bible tells you he was black by the way revelation 1:15, 'his skin was like brass burnt in a furnace' it goes black when you do that. In fact only Abraham Moses, Noah and David were white, everyone else in the bible is black pretty much black(and this is from a white guy)

have a read of this i wrote about the curse of caanan, you might learn a thing or two https://www.facebook.com/daz.lovegrove/posts/10211051895070357


merry christmas

S74rw4rd's picture

I have replied to your

I have replied to your assertions in a private message, as I think the public comment section is not actually intended for such a discussion.  I value to my privilege of participating in postpoems, and i do not wish to jeopardize it with such a discussion.  I have sent a copy to my friend Stephen, so an objective third party has a record of what I have said to you.