Oedipus The King Religion Essay

Oedipus the King is universally accepted as the Dramatic Masterpiece of Greek Theatre. Aristotle cites it as the most brilliant example of theatrical plot and a perfect example of Tragedy, comprising all the necessary elements. The play is regarded as the classic example of the “Tragedy of Fate” and the plot remarkably justifies it with the help of various characters and elements. One such element is ‘The Chorus’ which can be seen in various Greek tragedies.

The affairs in Oedipus the King, authored by Sophocles, show a relentless desire to discover the truth around Laius’ murder and the question neighboring his own birth, force him to the awful realization of his dreadful deeds. Oedipus’s pride depicts the distrust in the gods and the expedition for the truth, leave the king restless. The idea of fate and free-will which the Greeks believed to guide everything in creation to a balanced direction. The choices a manmade was simply accountable for his own actions. The concept of both fate and free-will play a extensive role in Oedipus’s destruction. Even Though, Oedipus was the sufferer of his fate, his intentions were

Ancient Greece is a very unique and foreign place to us today but surprisingly the ancient Greeks liked theatrics as much as we do now. This love for the stage led to many great plays being written one of which was “Oedipus the King”. “Oedipus the King” written by Sophocles in 430 BC is a Greek tragedy that shows the tragic downfall of Oedipus the king of Thebes. In this play Oedipus finds out that the prophecy that he had fled from so long ago had come true as he married his mother and murdered his father. “Oedipus the King” is a brilliant allegory for man's unwinnable struggle against fate and the puzzling actions of the indifferent gods.

Oedipus the King conveys the moral lesson of the catastrophe that results when human determination struggles to change fate. Humans are mortals, not always strong, and are fallible; the gods are not mortal, always strong, and are infallible. These differences plainly collide when Jocasta and Oedipus attempt to avoid their fates- what the “gods themselves have decreed.” Oedipus and Jocasta should have just submitted and not have had so much confidence in themselves; but, they are human, and could not change that which is predetermined. Thus, to the people of Thebes, their actions were blasphemous and offensive to the gods.

Sophocles, through his writing, begins to engage in a contemporary debate of the time period: fate versus free will. Philosophers of ancient Greece would often debate whether or not the gods had control over one’s life, and Sophocles entertains all aspects of this debate. Through the use of a meticulously crafted plot, humanity appears to have solved the issue prophesied at the birth of Oedipus. Ultimately, however, Sophocles demonstrates the revolving way in which preordination of action ultimately comes to fruition. This is epitomized when Oedipus is met by King Laius, his father, at the crossroads. When Oedipus is faced with the decision of whether or not to kill the man in front of him, he fulfills the prophesy which had been placed upon him before his birth. While this concept might seem like an ancient event that leads to an archaic discussion, it still invades relevant, personal philosophy of the world. The high school years require each student to arrive at a crossroads in their own life. Decisions permeate their existence. Behind everything, each student has to arrive at a conclusion as to who is the driving force behind each decision; is it themselves or is a higher power commanding everything to happen? This debate allows students to expand their thought in order to engage a metaphysical debate relevant to discussions of society.

The display of god’s power over one’s fate demonstrates that the will of the gods is what determines the future. Furthermore, in Antigone, the chorus says, “Fortunate is the man who has never tasted God’s vengeance! / When once the anger of the heavens has struck, that house is shaken” (I.ii.465-466). Oedipus incurred god's vengeance which determines his and his children’s fate.

Oedipus is now an old man who has been blinded from self-inflicted wounds to avoid confronting his mistakes, and through his misery he begins to realize the will of the gods may be the right way after all. Perhaps freewill is a tool used by the gods to prove how inept humanity is at ruling themselves. Oedipus, the embodiment of broken taboos, finds himself in a position in which he will determine which city-state will flourish over the coming centuries. His entire life, ruled by arrogant autonomy, was defined by pain and suffering. However, his death, guided by the will of the gods, was defined by self-sacrifice, generosity, and religious piety (Oedipus and Colonus 1884). Sophocles uses Oedipus at Colonus as an example illustrating the foolishness of freewill, how it is a deterrent from honor rather than a means to

The Greeks believed greatly in the gods just as this play reflects, this enhances the feeling of being disappointed with Oedipus. He appears to have been “reckless”: after all, as Oedipus says himself, “only a bad man would ignore what the God says”. Yet he does: he blames Kreon and Tyressias who informed them of the truth and labels them liars. At every interval in the play, the characters pray to the gods for their help and blessings. This would be appropriate because this play was originally performed at a religious festival. It is only in the gods that the Greeks hold all their faith; they beg them to “defend us, give us strength to drive out the pollution”. Ironically, Oedipus is, in fact, this ‘pollution’ and Sophocles again informs the audience that Oedipus’ fate is irreversible, the god’s decisions “always there, around him, encircling, tightening”.

An aspect that has been learned about the people of ancient Greece by reading their stories is that gods played a big role in mortal lives. Gods with their superior divinity could do however they please with vulnerable lives. This is evident in “The Trojan War” when

Humanity has drawn a connection between religions and morality since its beginning, most notably in Abrahamic religions and ancient Greek mythology, but this connection is not necessarily exclusive. It is possible for morality to exist without the presence of a god or other religious idea, and vice versa, the presence of a god does not necessarily mean there is a strong sense of morality. There are a plethora of immoral acts that have been committed by various groups in the name of religion; acts which many morally-competent people would find appalling. In this essay, the correlation between morality and religion, or lack of, will be explored and examined. For a large part of human history, religion was used to convey the moral values of a society.

In Oedipus Rex, Sophocles explores the conflict between a man’s intellectual reasoning and the universe beyond his grasp. This may seem like a generalization, but the play’s minor conflicts are arguably derivatives of the main struggle. As we would see, the fate or destiny that opposes Oedipus does not act directly on him, but creates a domino effect that through other conflicts drive him to face his destiny by unearthing his true identity. Similar to the Sphinx’s riddle that gave power to Oedipus, he must travel the different stages of life in order to “know thy-self” (Rudnytsky 264).

The audience feels so much empathy for this man, they start to think about how this might possibly happen to them. They see that Oedipus has experienced a very sudden reversal of fortune. Here is a man that appears to have it all. He is king of a wonderful town, has a beautiful wife, and four children. All of a sudden, he slowly finds out that all this is clouded by his destiny, one that he had tried his best to put behind him and not live out. Fear enters the play, not only for Oedipus, but for the audience as well. The audience begins to see that no matter how hard a person tries, the gods are still going to have their way. "Could the gods do this to me?" is a question that pops into the mind of every member of the audience. Because of their former feeling of pity the audience can see the Oedipus did not wholly deserve his misfortune. It seems as though the gods wanted to prove a point through him. Even Oedipus feels fear as he begins on his search for Laius' killer. "I am afraid, Jocasta, that I have said too much-that is why I want to see this man." (55). This is the first time that Oedipus realizes that he may in fact be the cursed killer of the former king of Thebes. The play also deals with the characters' blatant disregard and

Are we at the whim of the gods, or the gods at ours? The Ion, written ca. 420 and 415 BC, is normally interpreted as a criticism of ancient Greek religion. Though this true, it is an incomplete description of Euripides’ play. Apart form unfavourably criticizing a Greek deity, it deals with exploring the dual nature of reality, with deep metaphysical and moral problems. It sheds a light humanity’s conception of reality in its search of truth, all while struggling within the confines of religion. This essay will discuss these topics through the interpretations of three commentators, as well as offer my own interpretation of the play.

Within the play, Sophocles emphasizes upon the idea that no man has control over his own fate; this theme reflects upon the debates between philosophers of the time as they analyzed the importance of the gods in the lives of man. By underscoring the idea that the gods ensure that fate is inescapable, Sophocles argues against the scientific ideals arising at the time, claiming that holding such beliefs would eventually lead all men to ruin. In addition to Sophocles’ standpoint of faith, he also expresses his own democratic desire. Within Oedipus Rex, Sophocles shows the audience that the welfare of the state should never supersede a single man. This ideal is demonstrated through Oedipus’s own actions as a fair and just ruler. Upon realizing that it is his own presence that plagues Thebes, he accepts his fate and demands that he be driven from the city; through this, Sophocles argues that no man should represent the state as a whole as it is their own mistakes that may cause it's ruin.

It’s important that Socrates was walking back from a religious festival at the start of the dialogue, because it helps modern readers better understand religion in contemporary Ancient Greek culture. For the purposes of this essay, the definition of “religion” will be that of the Oxford Dictionary’s, “the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods.” (Oxford). At the time, while Plato was still alive in Ancient Greece (424-348 BCE), religion was used to account for acts of nature that were unexplained. Religion was used to relate to our human nature—it is our nature to ask questions, or to contemplate, and religion offered answers to many of those more difficult questions, questions dealing with our existence, the nature of reality, and the notion of the soul. But beyond these questions, religion (especially at the time) was used in attempts to influence fortune in both this world and beyond. This is why the Ancient Greeks built their temples and made their sacrificial offerings to their gods, and the reason why many who worship modern religions today pray and make effort to form connections with God. For many, religion offers a sense of “spiritual placement” and purpose (Theo), and it created a common bond between people in their poleis;