See something you'd like to change or add, but you've never edited an open encyclopædia before? This overview was written to help absolute beginners get started.

Main Page

From A Storehouse of Knowledge

Revision as of 14:44, 21 March 2009 by Philip J. Rayment (Talk | contribs)
(diff) ← Older revision | Current revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

Welcome to A Storehouse of Knowledge, the encyclopædia with a biblical worldview. Wise men store up knowledge (Proverbs 10:14, NIV)


We aim to provide a general English-language encyclopædia (or encyclopedia, if you prefer) with the following features:

  • A Storehouse of Knowledge has a biblical worldview as a basis. No encyclopædia is neutral, despite what it might claim (see more at right). We are up front in declaring our foundational assumptions.
  • We want A Storehouse of Knowledge to be family-friendly (no smut, and a careful approach to sensitive topics).
  • A Storehouse of Knowledge is intended to be suitable for students doing research.
  • We aim to have original content. With one exception[1], we do not allow content to be copied from Wikipedia or elsewhere.
  • We strive to avoid bloat in articles. If articles get too large, we will move large sections to a separate article and leave brief summaries of those sections in the main article.
  • We aim to provide a pleasant, fair, and democratic environment for contributors.

Learn more about A Storehouse of Knowledge!

Is this an encyclopædia about the Bible?

No. This is an encyclopædia about the universe we live in. We will have articles about a broad range of topics, just like other encyclopædias.

What makes this encyclopædia different to encyclopædias such as Britannica and Encarta are the foundational assumptions we make, which are different to the foundational assumptions they make.

But isn't an encyclopædia supposed to be neutral?

Encyclopædias like Wikipedia claim to be neutral, or at least to try to be, but we know of no encyclopædia which truly is neutral.

Consider this: One out of three people in the world consider themselves Christian[2], which in principle means that they believe what the Bible says, and the Bible says that God created the world. Indeed, anecdotal reports say that in China, home of up to 100 million Christians[3], becoming a Christian is equated with "giving up Darwin". In the United States, despite evolution being taught in schools for over half a century, still nearly half of Americans believe that God created man, as opposed to man evolving from something else. Even in Britain, home of Charles Darwin, a 2009 poll showed that over half the population had doubts about evolution and about one third of the population believed that God created the world within the last 10,000 years.[4]

And it's not only the general public. Although belief in evolution is much higher among those who have been indoctrinated with it in university, there are still over 100,000 scientists world-wide who reject the evolutionary explanation.[5] And this is despite widespread suppression of alternative views and even efforts to deny believers of alternative views positions in academia.

So how neutral are the major encyclopædias? Whether you look at Britannica, Wikipedia, World Book, or Encarta, they all present the naturalistic evolutionary explanation as true, without mentioning the possibility of God creating. Presenting one view whilst ignoring the major and widespread opposing view is not being neutral.

See Encyclopaedias and neutrality for a more detailed explanation of this.

Knowledge verse of the week

A wise man has great power, and a man of knowledge increases strength;Proverbs 24:5 (NIV)

  1. Contributors are in some cases allowed to copy from their own material on other web-sites.
  5. One American study showed that 5% of scientists believed that God created man, which equates to 100,000 scienists in the U.S. alone rejecting at least that aspect of evolution.
Personal tools
visitor navigation