>>Whether you call it ceremonial or not, it is part of the law, right?
>
>It doesn't appear you understand the law and what Jesus meant by "fulfilling" it. What does your dictionary say that "fulfill" means? In essense, it means to "satisfy."

I don't understand what you mean: If you say that "Christians need not observe the ceremonial part of the law", that means that the law has changed.

>Actually, the act of "murder" (not killing) was forbidden. Exodus 21:23 lists a time to kill.

OK, I agree that I should have said "murder".

>You're speaking too much in unsupported generalities. I cannot agree with this. What is your interpretation of Matthew 5:18 and Luke 16:17, which to me means the law does not change?

It means, to me, that there is a fundamental part of the law that doesn't change.

>>I find it quite logical that God reveals certain laws, and then changes them later, according to the changing needs of society.
>
>You are basically putting God in a box, and that's very dangerous.

On the contrary, I think it is God's prerrogative to do whatever He pleases. If it is His desire to abolish laws that were held sacred for millenia, I will not question His authority to do so.