If Bill Gates were a country, he would be the 37th richest country on Earth. This might be more for the random stats thread but it also fits here.
It's also possible that he's spending his money in an attempt to solve problems that he and his wife think are important. Compare that possibility with your theory and your theory rings pretty hollow.
Definitions from Merriam Webster Atheist Agnostic The first one is belief, having the belief in god or not having the belief in god. The second definition is for agnostic, a person who is holds "the view" that knowing the answer is unknowable. Exactly, they do not contridict. I do not know and do not believe knowing if god exists is knowable. I am agnostic. I don't believe in god, I am atheist, I am both terms. Many, perhaps most athiests are also agnostic. They do not answer the same question. I'll take it away from religion for a second as that tends to cloud issues because religious people tend to think everyone who is not religious still thinks about the world the same way a a religious person does. Lets think about the number Pi, 3.14159....... Do you know there is eventually an end or final didgit of Pi? I don't think anyone or any computer has solved Pi. I think we are up to more than five trillion digits. Now, different question, do you believe Pi ha an end. For me, I believe it does have an end, or at least sometimes has an end. This is because mathematically it seems logical to me that once the number gets small enough, it starts dealing in the quantum world which has its own laws dictating size. I can believe but not know, or I can not believe and not know. But, when it comes to religion people think that believing means knowing, which it does not. But more importantly they think not believing is the same as not knowing when they are totally different.
So government doesn't solve problems that people think are important? OK. Perfect reason to assure government doesn't touch any of Gates' money. The government spends enough money to buy Microsoft outright 16 times over EACH YEAR. That's the federal government. I would think the state of Washington would gladly put his fortune to use doing pretty much whatever he asked. In fact, these guys are capitalists and have very different views of how to get things done. Government isn't at all a choice they want to make. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venture_philanthropy (the word "government" does not appear in the document, period) Imagine if government ran our education system according to the first three bullet points on that page. Another good read: http://www.nbcnews.com/id/13556127/#.UZI5D5Urr4Q
The difference between : one who believes that there is no deity and one who does not believe there is a deity is subtle. Think it over
Edit - I was rude so I erased it But what I was basically getting at, I don't put any faith, trust or time into the bible, especially the New Testament.
This is an interesting, and seemingly contradictory, concept to me. For instance, does not observant Judaism require recitation of the Shema? How can one recite the Shema ("Hear O Israel, the LORD is our God, the LORD is one...") twice daily and not believe in God, without consciously and intentionally lying?
Judaism is both a religion and a race. You can be a member of the race and not practice the religion, eh?
WTF? The definitions you posted absolutely DO contradict each other. The definition of athiest is a set of beliefs that THERE IS NO GOD. You seem unable to see the difference between a) "not believing in God" and b)"believing that there is no God". If you can't see the difference between those two statements, then you shouldn't be having this discussion.
Of course you couldn't. You even included, again, the blatant contradiction and that you always have on this discussion.
