# Does this seem like a good background for my villain?



## nwillmott8897 (May 29, 2013)

In my most recent WIP my main villain is called Lilith, based after the character from the bible. In the bible, Lilith was the first partner of Adam, but when she fought for equality and was not given it, even though she was made from the same dirt as Adam, she left the Garden of Eden and began to kill children, so God created Eve in her place, made from one of Adam's ribs, so she could not claim equality.

In my story, Adam and Lilith were created by God (not the same as in the bible, i have a separate thread on it) to watch over the angels, who would in turn watch over Earth. But when Lilith is not given as much responsibility or power as Adam, she fought for it, and like her biblical counterpart, lost the fight. This sent her into a rage and she took her anger out on an angel, killing it. God drove Lilith out of Heaven and down onto Earth, which by this time had progressed to neanderthal levels. She found a large village and took control, But then after a few decades she decided to go back to Heaven and beg forgiveness as life on Earth was awful and she couldn't bear it any longer. when she get there she saw that God had created someone to take her place, a pitiful excuse for a woman called Eve, who allowed herself to be bossed around by Adam, and even the angels she commanded.

This pushed Lilith over the edge. Not only had she been replaced, but she'd been replaced by something so pitiful she didn't even want to be near it. This hatred warped her soul and made her into the first Demonic being in existence, the only thing she could think was destroying everything God had created, as a way of showing him that women were not some weak, pitiful creatures, but they were strong and much more powerful than man.

After decades of wrecking havoc on Earth, causing disease and natural disasters, God sent Adam, and an army of angels down to Earth to kill her. But when they discovered that she has changed and become a demon, they were unsure of a way to kill her, they weren't even sure if there was one, so they fled to Heaven to report back to God. But 8 angels stayed, these were corrupted angels who would soon become the Lilin, the demonic children of Lilith. 

When God hear of what Lilith had become, he himself became involved in the fight, desiccating her body, trapping her demonic spirit inside. He then created Purgatory, a prison for the Lilin, and any humans who do wrong in their lives (Hell). God them cast Lilith' desiccated body deep underground where she would never be found, but for the millennia that Lilith's body was buried, Lilith's spirit was alive, drive mad by the solitude.

The only reason Lilith is doing any of this is to prove to God and Adam that women are not a lesser being, but as something that should be treated equally, and with respect. She just chose the wrong path to do it.

Can you please  leave a reply if you liked it. Or even if you didn't, I'm happy to be told I'm wrong, it helps me improve. 

Thank you so much,
Nathan.


----------



## T.Allen.Smith (May 29, 2013)

I like the premise. Few villains are better than those whose intentions & actions you understand, if not condone.

Question related to the original myth:


nwillmott8897 said:


> In the bible, Lilith was the first partner of Adam, but when she fought for equality and was not given it, even though she was made from the same dirt as Adam, she left the Garden of Eden and began to kill children, so God created Eve in her place, made from one of Adam's ribs, so she could not claim equality.



How could Lilith begin to kill children when she left Eden, assuming Adam & Eve had the first children...Cain & Abel?


----------



## nwillmott8897 (May 29, 2013)

As a reply to T. Allen. Smith: this is a topic that none of my sources have mentioned so far, and something I never would have thought of. So thank you so much for bringing this up.  As for an answer, I would assume that either Lilith waited a long time to start killing children, or by the time she left the Garden of Eden, God had created other humans who had been having children. Also it's safe to say that Lilith and Adam would have had children before she left the Garden, so she might have started by killing those.


----------



## Mythopoet (May 29, 2013)

Just a minor quibble: Lilith is not in the Bible.


----------



## T.Allen.Smith (May 29, 2013)

Mythopoet said:


> Just a minor quibble: Lilith is not in the Bible.



That depends on one's view of history. If you're talking about the bible & it's agreed upon composition under Constantine & the Council of Nicea then you may be right. However, aren't the other books of the bible (Pre-Constantine) that were excluded called the Apocrypha? Could she be written about somewhere in those books?

I'm no expert but I do know that the modern King James Bible isn't the bible as it was originally thought of by the many early competing & differentiated sects of Christianity.


----------



## nwillmott8897 (May 30, 2013)

She is mentioned in the bible as "a screech owl" on at least one occasion, and in older versions of the bible, such as the Hebrew bible, and some of the worlds oldest found holy scriptures, her story is there. I suppose I should of mentioned that her story isn't directly mentioned in the modern bible.


----------



## Mythopoet (May 30, 2013)

nwillmott8897 said:


> She is mentioned in the bible as "a screech owl" on at least one occasion, and in older versions of the bible, such as the Hebrew bible, and some of the worlds oldest found holy scriptures, her story is there. I suppose I should of mentioned that her story isn't directly mentioned in the modern bible.



The word "lilit" is found once in the entire Bible (and I include the so-called Apocrypha because I'm Catholic and it is still part of our Bible) and its translation is uncertain. Some translations use "Lamia" (as in the creature from Greek mythology) and some use "night creature" and some leave it as "Lilith". Since there are no other instances of the word in the Bible there is nothing to compare it against to ease translation. The word does not appear again until later, non-Biblical documents. The Babylonian Talmud, for instance, has some references to "Lilith" but not her "story". The references read more like allusions to a supernatural being (like a pagan goddess or demonic creature) that the text assumes the reader should be familiar with. It is not until later Jewish folklore that the "story" of Lilith is fleshed out.

I realize that you are writing fantasy, but perhaps a little more research would help you to deepen your version of Lilith. I find that knowing well the sources that I use as part of my fantasy helps me create a better sense of realism.


----------



## T.Allen.Smith (May 30, 2013)

Mythopoet said:


> The word "lilit" is found once in the entire Bible (and I include the so-called Apocrypha because I'm Catholic and it is still part of our Bible) and its translation is uncertain.


I thought the Catholic church employed the King James Bible & portions of the apocrypha like the Old Testament books Tobias, Judith, the Wisdom of Solomon, Baruch, and Maccabees. Yet others, such as First Esdras, Second Esdras, Epistle of Jeremiah, Susanna, Bel and the Dragon, Prayer of Manasseh, Prayer of Azariah, and Laodiceans are not part of official canon.  

Then there are the New Testament books that never made it into any canon. That list is rather long but a few of the notables...
The First Book of Adam and Eve
The Second Book of Adam and Eve
The Book of the Secrets of Enoch
The Psalms of Solomon
The Odes of Solomon
Testament of Simeon
Testament of Levi
The Testament of Judah
The Testament of Joseph

Is this not accurate?


----------



## MaccosBridgman (May 30, 2013)

May I ask if you have a problem with Nathan and his work as he has clearly looked into this subject and has been backed up by the administrator? As well you say your devote catholic yet did not know some of the information that has been told to you.


----------



## brokethepoint (May 30, 2013)

The Catholic Bible is going to be an RSV version.

The RSV and KJV can differ based on which source texts they used and the method for interpretation.


----------



## T.Allen.Smith (May 30, 2013)

brokethepoint said:


> The Catholic Bible is going to be an RSV version.
> 
> The RSV and KJV can differ based on which source texts they used and the method for interpretation.



What is RSV? I'm not familiar with that term?

I suppose I could look it up but...


----------



## brokethepoint (May 30, 2013)

Revised Standard Version


----------



## Mythopoet (May 30, 2013)

MaccosBridgman said:


> May I ask if you have a problem with Nathan and his work as he has clearly looked into this subject and has been backed up by the administrator? As well you say your devote catholic yet did not know some of the information that has been told to you.



Backed up by the administrator? For what purpose? Is this or is this not a thread requesting feedback? I gave some. Perhaps it wasn't what he was looking for, but I certainly hope that this isn't a board where people are only allowed to post glowing feedback and are never allowed to disagree with anyone. And I'm not sure what information has been revealed to me that I didn't know.



brokethepoint said:


> The Catholic Bible is going to be an RSV version.
> 
> The RSV and KJV can differ based on which source texts they used and the method for interpretation.



There are many Catholic translations as there are many Protestant translations. I don't use the RSV personally. 

T.Allen.Smith, you've listed a bunch of books that are not Biblical at all or considered authoritative in any capacity. I thought that you were originally referring to the books that were removed from the canon when the Luther Bible and KJV were produced. Those books (Maccabees, Sirach, Wisdom, etc.) are in my Bible.

And honestly, I didn't intend to get into a discussion about the Bible. I realize the OP is writing fantasy so my comment really doesn't matter. It just bugged me a bit that he referred to Lilith as a character from the Bible when she definitely isn't. There is one brief instance of the word "lilit" in the Bible and scholars do not know what the real context of the word is since there are so few ancient references to Lilith and they do not give a "story" for her. The oldest instance of Lilith as Adam's wife is from a medieval text.


----------



## T.Allen.Smith (May 30, 2013)

Mythopoet said:


> ...I certainly hope that this isn't a board where people are only allowed to post glowing feedback and are never allowed to disagree with anyone. And I'm not sure what information has been revealed to me that I didn't know.


It's not that type of community at all (trust me lol... or just read some of the threads... tons of disagreement). Tactful disagreement and discourse is encouraged. It's a learning tool when properly applied. Constructive feedback & criticism, differing viewpoints & opinions, learning from other members in a tolerant and understanding atmosphere while retaining a family friendly basis, focused on Fantasy writing... that is what Mythic Scribes is about. 



Mythopoet said:


> ...I didn't intend to get into a discussion about the Bible. I realize the OP is writing fantasy so my comment really doesn't matter. It just bugged me a bit that he referred to Lilith as a character from the Bible when she definitely isn't. There is one brief instance of the word "lilit" in the Bible and scholars do not know what the real context of the word is since there are so few ancient references to Lilith and they do not give a "story" for her. The oldest instance of Lilith as Adam's wife is from a medieval text.


Sometimes, threads take on a life of their own. We have to be prepared for that possibility but you are never required to, or expected to, respond to those spin-offs either. That is, of course, your choice.

In my view, the fact that the name "sort of" appears, and is mentioned in Medieval tetxs, makes the possibility of her being a villain even more interesting than if she was easily found in scriptures. The mystery,and shadowy veil, lend a certain plausibility to the tale. That intrigues me.



Mythopoet said:


> T.Allen.Smith, you've listed a bunch of books that are not Biblical at all or considered authoritative in any capacity. I thought that you were originally referring to the books that were removed from the canon when the Luther Bible and KJV were produced. Those books (Maccabees, Sirach, Wisdom, etc.) are in my Bible.


I'm by no means an expert...just an interested party. I find religious history exceedingly interesting...how things came to be...influences on modern thinking, things of this nature. My inquiries and comments were only meant to share my understandings and learn from those who have a firm grasp on the subject (or at least more intimate knowledge than myself).

Still, those books do exist do they not? Weren't they excluded from the original Bible at the Council of Nicea? I've never read them so I can't speak with any authority. However, I often wonder when I see debates like this, if a character such as Lilith, would be found within books like these.


----------



## Devor (May 31, 2013)

It would be wrong to describe the New Testament Apocrypha as part of the Bible.  Most of them were rejected out of hand for good reason, and a handful were close but rejected because they weren't tied close enough to the apostles.  They are not a forgotten sect of Christianity, they were written by people who had nothing to do with the apostles and whose writing greatly conflicted with the Gospels.  Most of them teach a "Gnostic" theology.  The standard was that they had to be written either by the Apostles or by someone very close to them, which was based on the claims of the Churches those apostles founded.  Many of those claims are documented.

The Deuterocanon refers to the handful of Old Testament books which were removed from the Bible by Martin Luther during the Reformation, based on a claim that they weren't accepted by the Jews.  Of course, the Jews threw them out for being written in Greek and sounding too Christian, and only one branch of Jews did so.  Hanukkah comes from the Deuterocanon.  They remain in the Catholic Bible, and actually, a slightly expanded list is included in the Orthodox Bible.

((edit))




T.Allen.Smith said:


> Still, those books do exist do they not? Weren't they excluded from the original Bible at the Council of Nicea? I've never read them so I can't speak with any authority. However, I often wonder when I see debates like this, if a character such as Lilith, would be found within books like these.



Only a couple of books were really in contention at Nicea.  Most of the Churches had settled on very similar canons on their own long before that, especially the four Gospels, and in fact, the biggest debate was on the book of Hebrews, which many had previously left out.


----------



## Devor (May 31, 2013)

brokethepoint said:


> The Catholic Bible is going to be an RSV version.



The Catholic Bible is the Vulgate, a Latin copy of the Bible translated by St. Jerome in the 5th Century.  It's generally recognized that St Jerome had copies of Greek Manuscripts that are older and more diverse than anything we have today.  So Catholics will use any variety of Bibles translated from Jerome's Vulgate.

Also - before anyone asks - Latin is a terse language compared to Greek.  Latin translates easily into just about any language, while Greek is very nuanced and philosophical, and will lose different layers of meaning depending on which language you translate into.  The idea of using a Latin standard for the Bible is that you can translate not only the Bible, but the commentaries, into languages that don't have the scholarship that it would take to have commentaries written in that language.  And the commentaries will still be appropriate, where they wouldn't be if you translated the Bible from Greek.  The commentaries would be discussing the wrong nuances about the language.

The KJV is only the authoritative Bible for a handful of Protestant sects.  Most will argue that the NASB is better for its scholarship.


----------



## nwillmott8897 (May 31, 2013)

I'm not very religious, which means i really don't have a clue about most of what's being said about bibles... But, it has made me realise that maybe I worded the original post wrong, as I didn't know there was such a diversity when it comes to bibles. All the differing opinions between people who have read different versions of the bible has shown me that I shouldn't refer to her as "biblical." Of course, Lilith actually being in the bible in 2013 is not an important, seeing as my point of divergence happens in 2058. If needs must, I can reveal that maybe somewhere around 2035 - 2040 I could have the Lilith story added to a new version of the bible, possibly named the Queen Elizabeth the Second Bible. And _maybe_ the reason the Lilith story was added to the bible was because some ancient tablets or scrolls were found that were definitely from the era the rest of the old testament was written..?

Do you think that this is a good way of solving the problem?


----------



## Devor (May 31, 2013)

I guess that works, for a story.  Lilith is pretty much a medieval Jewish myth, and there's only vague imagery associated with the word before that.  So you would need to add some kind of secret history for the concept to work.


----------



## T.Allen.Smith (May 31, 2013)

Here's the thing...you don't need to over worry about fact. It's great if you can have a basic understanding though. The research you do will bleed into the fiction and make it seem tangible & real. 

What you DO need is plausibility. Can you write the story so these facts are interwoven with your own creation to make the story of Lilith plausible? If you can do that, you have no issue.


----------



## Steerpike (May 31, 2013)

Here is something I came across regarding whether Lilith appears in the Bible:

Isaiah 34:14f - Lilith Reference

As far as I know, there is no reference in the Bible to the story of Lilith being Adam's first wife (or partner, or whatever she was meant to be), or really anything about her. I thought the stories of her came from other sources.


----------



## Bpeter (Jun 1, 2013)

I liked it, sounds like it could be part of the bible


----------



## Tom (Jun 1, 2013)

This makes for a good fictional story, but the keyword is fictional. Lilith is mentioned nowhere in the Bible; she grew out of Jewish myth. Adam and Eve were the first two humans, the ONLY first humans.

Other than that, I like it.


----------



## nwillmott8897 (Jun 1, 2013)

I suppose I should have worded my original question better, instead of just typing "from the bible" but for my story it actually works out better that she isn't in the bible, that way I can say she was wiped from the bible because her being in it made God seem flawed. But I never intended this to become a religious debate... I've known from the start that any mentions of her in the bible are only speculative... I just didn't want to write a paragraph of information.

But anyway... Thanks for all the great feedback on my ideas, it's really helped me progress my idea along, and made me realise that in the future I should take my time with a post and make sure that I give ALL the information before putting it up. 
Thanks a bunch


----------



## T.Allen.Smith (Jun 2, 2013)

Tom Nimenai said:


> ...Adam and Eve were the first two humans, the ONLY first humans.


Or so you thought....enter enough plausibility into the myth and what is accepted traditionally, and absolutes like "the ONLY first humans" fly right out the window.


----------



## Asura Levi (Jun 2, 2013)

That is a book belonging to my father who work inside the Catholic Church about the many 'meanings' behind the names writien specially in the Old Testament, summing it up, this book kind of made me look to the words 'God made the man and called Adan, and then the woman and called Eve' more like 'God made the man and called Man and then the woman and called Woman'.

Of course, this one of the many ways to read just inside the Catholic Church, let alone all the Christians Denominations.


----------

