Recently I discussed my ancestry with a Church Minister, telling that according to Geni I was related to Joseph, Jesus' father. My impression is that the story was not credible to him, even with the reservations and assumptions of possible mistakes done by fellow researchers.
Having now had the time again to browse the ancestry path, which goes via Jesus' brother James the Just (Righteous), it seems that there are some profiles mostly before Alfred the Great's time for which I don't easily find other Internet sources. Of course this makes me think: have I had too much reliance on uncertain sources?
If we are to keep Geni as a respected genealogy website, I would like to propose the following recommendation for anyone publishing new profiles: let us document our sources. This is especially critical if we go back to times beyond the reach of church-books and other commonly used genealogy sources.
Would it be possible to improve the documentation level in Geni?
I do agree, that we scholdn't make any records that we can't argu for.
But on the other hand I don't think genius ever wil be "a respected genealogy website" it will always be considered as a toy for amateurs and I do not think we will be Able To make it nothing more.
But of cause we need to documentate our records as good as possible, but again is fx Wikipedia a reliable source
I think one can use Wikipedia but be a litle careful.
I had an argument here on Geni regarding parents to a historical profile. The next day "someone" had change the information on Wikipedia! But not on all languages and not pictureinformation!
(You can check when the wikipediapage is updated on the bottom of he page.)
Improving sources has long been on the Geni 'to do' list and I believe there is something in the pipeline soon. (follow these threads on the forum). What is being suggested by some forum members is that if an event is backed by a reliable source there should be a way to lock such information with the proviso that there is always room for someone to contest the source or come up with an alternative source at which point if the first person agrees they can unlock the information and add the second source.
The Discussion pages for each profile is probably the start of this, I imagine.
I try not to rely on Wikipedia as a source because it is just like Geni in that people randomly add to it. for the medieval profiles I use Medlands a lot as it has supporting sources.
Who can document that Josef is the father of Jesus? In Bible stays that maria was pregnant through ''The Holy Spirit'', also not from Josef. We more modern people have just a little problem to believe in this,though we always say that we believe it by every visit in church.
To be a little more profan I can tell you what my religion teacher meant about this pregnance. He said: ''What stays in Bible is very difficult to believe in modern time with insight in biological processes.''. He even meant that Maria maybe have had a ''one night stand'' with somebody and tried to save the pregnancy for Josef with that seh had met ''The Holy Spirit''. Is it really anybody who really have a sure documentation for Jesus' father so I am very interesting as I also in my connected tree have connection to Josef.
The original poster noted he was related to Joseph, step-father of Jesus. He did not say he was descended from him. He claims the ancestral line goes through Jesus' brother, James the Just. Jesus, son of Mary and son of God, had cousins, which in Biblical times were referred to as brothers, but Jesus had no direct brothers. Joseph and Mary never had any biological children together. These are the tenants of the Catholic Church and most likely are supported by some Protestant denominations as well. It is not something we can argue about here. This discussion should remain about documenting sources and should not drift into trying to prove or disprove beliefs of the Church. If you want to do that kind of debate, I suggest you find a discussion group for Biblical conspiracy theorists. Here's a hint: Google DaVinci Code.