Family History Question: For ancestors who lived prior to 1400, we're not supposed to do their Temple Work?

[nuclearfuels]

I've heard from a family history specialist that:

1. Ancestors who lived prior to 1400 AD are likely in lines of royalty and their work has already been done. (Why is that not recorded in FamilySearch, bruh?)

2. Ancestor who lived prior to 1400 AD - the records are sketchy, unreliable, not validated, etc. so doing their Temple work is not a current expectation.

Are either of these claims in the Church Handbook(s)? 

I ask because some of my pioneer heritage lines date back to Adam and Eve. 

Also, doing research I discovered a famous person (circa 400 AD) was married and I'd like to help him get sealed or married to his wife for time and all eternity. 

3. Some people anciently falsified their ancestry claiming they were connected to royalty so one needs to verify that such is not the case with one's ancestral lines that date back to Jehoiakim and thus back to Adam and Eve. (Happy to verify - not sure exactly how though)

4. In a few years AI will populate all of our ancestor lines and all we'll need to do is verify the accuracy and do their Temple work. (This I can see happening.)

[Calm]

17 minutes ago, nuclearfuels said:

Ancestors who lived prior to 1400 AD are likely in lines of royalty and their work has already been done. (Why is that not recorded in FamilySearch, bruh?)

 

Iirc, it is recorded on family groups sheets I looked at eons ago. They may not be in FamilySearch so people don’t repeat the work anyway. 

[Mfbnew]

1 hour ago, nuclearfuels said:

I've heard from a family history specialist that:

1. Ancestors who lived prior to 1400 AD are likely in lines of royalty and their work has already been done. (Why is that not recorded in FamilySearch, bruh?)

2. Ancestor who lived prior to 1400 AD - the records are sketchy, unreliable, not validated, etc. so doing their Temple work is not a current expectation.

Are either of these claims in the Church Handbook(s)? 

I ask because some of my pioneer heritage lines date back to Adam and Eve. 

Also, doing research I discovered a famous person (circa 400 AD) was married and I'd like to help him get sealed or married to his wife for time and all eternity. 

3. Some people anciently falsified their ancestry claiming they were connected to royalty so one needs to verify that such is not the case with one's ancestral lines that date back to Jehoiakim and thus back to Adam and Eve. (Happy to verify - not sure exactly how though)

4. In a few years AI will populate all of our ancestor lines and all we'll need to do is verify the accuracy and do their Temple work. (This I can see happening.)

Bingo

These are POLICIES not doctrinal rules.

It is so hard to do "research", which is mostly legendary, that essentially it wastes time that could be devoted to generations which are more fruitful, which you have already learned. Go to the Los Angeles Family Search Center on line.   On that web page there is a tab "Live Help Now". Business hours 10 to 6 Pacific.

The lines which allegedly "go back to Adam" are mostly royal families whose power was enhanced by the recognition- obviously on shaky "research".

After all, gotta find SOMETHING to make the Boss happy! 

 

Edited September 3 by Mfbnew

[webbles]

1 hour ago, nuclearfuels said:

1. Ancestors who lived prior to 1400 AD are likely in lines of royalty and their work has already been done. (Why is that not recorded in FamilySearch, bruh?)

FamilySearch doesn't always have the correct details visible.  For example, I have an ancestor who was sealed in the temple in early Utah while alive (I've seen the physical sealing temple record).  But if I look on FamilySearch, it says that the person was sealed in the last 50 years.  I asked about why and they said that there were multiple records of this person in the db and one had the correct sealing date.  But that one wasn't available to be merged to the one I could see so my view will always have the wrong information.

I suspect a lot of the royal lines are similar.  Their work was done but is not tied in correctly in the system.

[Duncan]

Nobody has documented lines that go back to Adam/Eve

read this from family search

https://www.familysearch.org/en/wiki/Can_I_Trace_Genealogy_Back_to_Adam_and_Eve%3F#:~:text=Though each living person's life,back to Adam and Eve.

Edited September 3 by Duncan

[Mfbnew]

19 minutes ago, Duncan said:

Nobody has documented lines that go back to Adam/Eve

read this from family search

https://www.familysearch.org/en/wiki/Can_I_Trace_Genealogy_Back_to_Adam_and_Eve%3F#:~:text=Though each living person's life,back to Adam and Eve.

Dang that Adam. 😁

He forgot to build a city hall where he could write down births and marriages on the skins of animals!

😉

[Calm]

3 hours ago, Mfbnew said:

The lines which allegedly "go back to Adam" are mostly royal families whose power was enhanced by the recognition- obviously on shaky "research".

This is a big problem and may be why they restrict such information.

[Rain]

5 hours ago, nuclearfuels said:

I've heard from a family history specialist that:

1. Ancestors who lived prior to 1400 AD are likely in lines of royalty and their work has already been done. (Why is that not recorded in FamilySearch, bruh?)

Perhaps the specialist meant records of ancestors are likely from royalty rather than ancestors are likely from royalty?  The second only works if everyone or most everyone was royalty. 

5 hours ago, nuclearfuels said:

2. Ancestor who lived prior to 1400 AD - the records are sketchy, unreliable, not validated, etc. so doing their Temple work is not a current expectation.

Are either of these claims in the Church Handbook(s)? 

I ask because some of my pioneer heritage lines date back to Adam and Eve. 

Also, doing research I discovered a famous person (circa 400 AD) was married and I'd like to help him get sealed or married to his wife for time and all eternity. 

3. Some people anciently falsified their ancestry claiming they were connected to royalty so one needs to verify that such is not the case with one's ancestral lines that date back to Jehoiakim and thus back to Adam and Eve. (Happy to verify - not sure exactly how though)

4. In a few years AI will populate all of our ancestor lines and all we'll need to do is verify the accuracy and do their Temple work. (This I can see happening.)

 

[Calm]

8 minutes ago, Rain said:

The second only works if everyone or most everyone was royalty. 

5 hours ago, nuclearfuels said:

The one we have records of are at least nobility, I am guessing.

[nuclearfuels]

13 hours ago, Mfbnew said:

These are POLICIES not doctrinal rules.

Thank you @Mfbnew
Is there a handbook section which captures this?

[Kenngo1969]

21 hours ago, Duncan said:

Nobody has documented lines that go back to Adam/Eve

read this from family search

https://www.familysearch.org/en/wiki/Can_I_Trace_Genealogy_Back_to_Adam_and_Eve%3F#:~:text=Though each living person's life,back to Adam and Eve.

... Yet!  

P.S.: I rather think it will be exciting to serve as proxy for our ancestors for Temple ordinances in the Millennium: It's one thing to have an old record in front of you (though, in some ways, certainly, that's exciting enough!) and yet to wonder about its accuracy and provenance.  It will be quite another thing, indeed, to have that ancestor, in vision, standing in front of you, petitioning to have ordinances performed on (in my case) his behalf.

Edited September 4 by Kenngo1969

[Mfbnew]

11 hours ago, nuclearfuels said:

Thank you @Mfbnew
Is there a handbook section which captures this?

Honestly I don't know.  Here is a link to the handbook.  https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/general-handbook?lang=eng

Why would God or anyone else "prohibit" one from researching his family as he wants? 

Call the library as I suggested and ask them.   They know megatons more than I do, because they have spent years on these issues. 

I feel that my purpose here is to help you, and that is about all I can do.

Honestly, if you want my opinion there are two ways to look at this- 1- Follow what you can as kind of a hobby-  but honestly I don't know how far it will get.  To me, even if you go all the way to the end, and actually FIND records that look good to you- they may still NOT be "accurate" for many reasons.   Was Adam "real"?  Is he a myth given to us to understand agency as an example?   Are your records "true" in the sense of "what really happened" or has some scribe thousands of years ago made it all up?

So 2- You could take it on as a project of learning- that even parables and "myths" can be "true" in the sense of teaching valuable lessons about life.  The "truth" - in the ordinary sense of such - becomes irrelevant and what is learned becomes more important than "what really happened".   It's like Jesus' parables about life-we know they ARE parables-but yet they teach us fabulous truths about life.

But regardless I would not let any handbook stop me from going forward If and only if I really wanted to do so.

 

[Dario_M]

That's interesting. 1400 is so long ago. Back in those times there was only the Catholic church. Even the protestands came later. Let alone our church the LDS church.

In 1400 the Catholic church was really important (more important then the church is these days) and maybe we can just say that people who lived in the 1400s have been saved allready? Not by our church though. But another. Can that also be a reason why we don't really need to to temple work for them.

[Nofear]

While most of my ancestry is not-royalty, I do occasionally hit royalty. One of the ordinances was done as recently as 2022 (not by me).

[Stargazer]

On 9/3/2024 at 3:59 AM, webbles said:

FamilySearch doesn't always have the correct details visible.  For example, I have an ancestor who was sealed in the temple in early Utah while alive (I've seen the physical sealing temple record).  But if I look on FamilySearch, it says that the person was sealed in the last 50 years.  I asked about why and they said that there were multiple records of this person in the db and one had the correct sealing date.  But that one wasn't available to be merged to the one I could see so my view will always have the wrong information.

I suspect a lot of the royal lines are similar.  Their work was done but is not tied in correctly in the system.

I was surprised one time in following back along a line in FamilySearch that just kept going until it hit a king of England. Since past a certain point the people in the line were all known to history, I started looking them up to see if their information was correct. It was, mostly, but then I found an interesting case where the person (who was a descendant of a king and was actually buried in a royal vault) was credited in FS with well over a dozen children, one of which was supposedly my ancestor. Only problem was that in real life the person died before child-bearing age. I notified FS about this interesting fact, and when I checked a month or two later, the connection had vanished, along with my being the descendant of a king of England.

But according to RelativeFinder I am a descendant of Francis I King of France! He's my 12th GGFather. And Ferdinand II King of Aragon is my 14th GGFather. Princess Diana is my 11th cousin, and King Charles III is my 14th cousin 3 times removed. My father actually met Charles back in 1970 when Charles was merely a prince.

And of course it may be all wrong.

But, on the other hand...