God Almighty . - God Almighty is NOT your 85th Great Grandfather

Started by Private User on Sunday, December 25, 2016
Problem with this page?

Participants:

Profiles Mentioned:

Related Projects:

This discussion has been closed by an administrator.
Showing 1-30 of 276 posts

You are absolutely right! Shame on those who are responsible for it!

12/25/2016 at 12:19 PM

He suppose to be my 129th great.

12/25/2016 at 12:25 PM

No but he is my Father ! :)

Hi Benjamin, from what i understand the biblical tree isn't attached to the living tree (ie to anyone currently living). If you are seeing a profile that is attached it has probably been created when it shouldn't have been.

If you find these, under the Actions button is Report. If you report them, Customer Service regularly goes through them and deletes incorrect ones. It may take them a while as people seem to love creating them.

Leanne

12/25/2016 at 7:57 PM

That would lead the whole world back to god, but it doesn't...

12/25/2016 at 11:18 PM

Why take it so seriously ? If God exsist , he/ she must have a lot of humor .

12/26/2016 at 7:58 AM

Personally I thought it was kindly neat. I know God was in my family, now I can show it. So it is no big deal. And besides that, it says that the living tree and the bible tree is a little different. This is on my Dad's side and my mother's I get back to the 15th ggfather. So I'm happy.

12/26/2016 at 8:49 AM

I think it was nice that someone took the time to show how we are connected on the Biblical side. There are Gods on the Mythological side as well. So I wonder if you are overreacting, Benjamin.

12/27/2016 at 6:19 AM

There might or might not be a historical figure who had children who claimed kingship in Scandinavia, and was later identified with the mythological god "Odin".
All we know is that we have tales telling of people who descend from Odin; we don't know if they claimed to be descended from a god, their n'th descendants added the god into their lineage for reasons of their own, or if they claimed to be descended from a man that their descendants then called a god.

We'll likely never know. All we know for sure is that the tales exist and were written down by 1350 or so - because we have manuscripts dating that far back.
All else is, to some degree, speculation.

12/27/2016 at 6:22 AM

(note: if you want to cut your own connection to these people, the most fruitful times to look at are between 800 and 1200. Scholars say that there are no (zero, nada, nil, none) well documented lines of descent from antiquity. So if you look for profiles in that date range, and find someone who doesn't have documentation, or where the story looks "odd", it's probably a fiction inserted by an 18th century genealogical fantasist in order to "prove" the noble descent of some person who wanted it proved.)

12/27/2016 at 7:01 AM

Private User what I usually do is to do a quick scan for sources (starting with google search and Wikipedia lookups), and then start a discussion on the profile. Frequently someone who knows more than me will chime in and tell me what makes sense to cut (or not).

12/27/2016 at 9:24 AM

@benjamin apologies - I have seen many times that it's a norm to tag people to who you're replying, since otherwise it may be unclear who I'm responding to (in many cases there are other intermediate messages). I didn't know you desired a different treatment. If I remember this in the future, I'll try to avoid it.

12/28/2016 at 5:55 AM

Religious and mythological deities and other non-humans should not be included in genealogical research. If they are, then it can no longer be considered serious, fact-based research.

12/28/2016 at 10:20 AM

If we get relationship locking (so that we can stop people from adding them back), I'm in favor of removing all the ancestors that are impossilbe (centaurs, cows licking their offspring out of a salt rock....) - those descriptions belong in the "about me", not in the ancestries.
The stories ... those we should preserve.

12/28/2016 at 11:43 AM

Forgive me, but I find this kind of discussion a bit frustrating, not least because "biblical Adam" should be about 128 generations, so there are some serious shortcuts taken. :)

We do not as yet have relationship locking. We can disconnect nodes, do so frequently, but they are put back by naifs.

The way to help is to identify the unlikely medieval connection between years 800 and 1200, start a discussion from that profile, suggesting disconnect.

The day will come soon enough when we can isolate off the mythological, but the technology is not in place as yet. However, working together, we "can right now" work on the medieval tree.

But we can't do it without helping each other.

12/28/2016 at 3:49 PM

My question is, how does anyone know lineage that far back? It say Jesus Christ is my 1st cousin, 67 times removed...???

Erica Howton and Shmuel-Aharon Kam (Kahn / שמואל-אהרן קם (קאן, I think I have found where the 'biblical tree' and the 'modern tree' are perhaps incorrectly connected (but I could be completely wrong)

Joseph, Vizier of Egypt, Prophet is in the 'biblical tree' project with 4 children

Ephraim . is not in the project
Ephraim . is not in the project
Ephraim . is in the project
Menashe . is in the project

Menashe is the father of Descendant of Manasseh, Joseph's son. Generations Missing and grandfather of Rokovunisei (Nai) Cepi Egypt . and this is where the "About Me' stops referencing the bible and there appears to be about 3000 years missing.

As I said I could be completely wrong but if you could have a look and disconnect at the appropriate spot that would (temporarily) fix one of the issues (until someone adds another connection).

Thanks Leanne

12/29/2016 at 2:36 PM

Good one! This is the way to do it .

I've disconnected Descendant of Manasseh, Joseph's son. Generations Missing from Menashe . as parent and noted this in the profile overview.

Keep 'em coming.

Okay - I am no longer connected to King David of Israel

Can everyone else check and let me know if you are still connected and I will try to work out the possibly incorrect connection

Can you also please check if you are connected to God Almighty . as I think that it fixed that one too.

Can you also please check if you are connected to Jesus - i think it is fixed too

Should have also fixed Odin, {Norse God} too.

12/29/2016 at 3:48 PM

Forgive me if I send you on a wild goose chase - father and son estimated to be born 500 years apart

Elai ap Rhain born c447, his son Elisedd ap Neufedd c998

12/29/2016 at 5:38 PM

looks like estimated dates. I'm going to tag Anne Brannen to take a look at

Isabel verch Gwerystan b 994 and her grand daughter in law Ceindrych verch Rhiwallon b 1610

12/29/2016 at 5:38 PM

sorry - 610 for Ceindrych (my typo)

This one Enoch / Idris is MP'd with bible references 3138BC.
His father Sayyid Hussein bin Imaam Muhammad al-Jawad is not MP'd, has no bible references and is born estimated 816-864
His grandfather has actual dates of 811 - 4000 years between grandfather and grandson.

12/29/2016 at 6:33 PM

The Welsh dates are often problematic because the various medieval manuscripts give varying lines; typically generations get left out.

The further back you go, the worse it gets.

I will look at this piece of the tree in the morning!

Thanks for the heads up.

12/29/2016 at 7:23 PM

Yes - there's a parent conflict Enoch / Idris

Son of Sayyid Hussein bin Imaam Muhammad al-Jawad;
Jared . and Baraka / Baltsa / Beltsea
Husband of Edna .
Father of Baraki'il .; Methuselah .; Regim .; Elimelech .; Melca . and 9 others
Brother of Azriel .; Yardukil; Elimelech .; Mahnaukh; Other Sons & Daughters . and 1 other

So I am disconnecting from Sayyid Hussein bin Imaam Muhammad al-Jawad as father

Private User
12/30/2016 at 6:04 AM

Charlemagne is still my 33rd great grandfather (after a pathway renewal).

Showing 1-30 of 276 posts

Create a free account or login to participate in this discussion