Please Support the Bible Translation Work of the Updated American Standard Version (UASV)
$5.00
 |
 |
 |
Exodus 21:22–25 Updated American Standard Version (UASV)
22 “If men should struggle with each other and they hurt a pregnant woman and her children come out, yet there is no injury, he shall surely be fined as the woman’s husband lays on him, and he shall pay as the judges determine. 23 And if any harm follows, you shall give life for life, 24 eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, 25 burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.”
The Controversy Over Translation: Miscarriage or Premature Birth?
Exodus 21:22–25 is one of the most disputed passages in the Torah when it comes to its ethical and legal implications concerning abortion and the status of the unborn child. The key interpretive and translational debate revolves around the Hebrew phrase וְיָצְאוּ יְלָדֶיהָ (wĕyāṣʾû yĕlādêhā), literally, “and her children come out.” Some English versions (notably the RSV, NRSV, NEB, REB, JPS Tanakh, NJPS) translate this as “she has a miscarriage,” whereas others (KJV, ESV, NASB95, UASV, LSB, CSB) more faithfully render it along the lines of “her children come out” or “she gives birth prematurely.”
The issue is critical. If the text is taken to mean miscarriage, then the life of the fetus appears to be treated as of lesser value, since only a fine is levied. If, however, the text means premature live birth, then the unborn child is regarded fully as a person—subject to the same protections as any other human life.
The verb יָצָא (yāṣāʾ, “to go/come out”) overwhelmingly means “to go out” or “to come out,” never “to miscarry.” The noun יֶלֶד (yeled) means “child” or “boy,” used throughout the Hebrew Bible for living human beings (e.g., Exod. 2:3, “the child was growing”). Together, the phrase naturally means “her children come out” (i.e., she gives birth prematurely). This is supported by every major Hebrew lexicon (BDB, HALOT, TWOT). The mistranslation “miscarriage” is thus interpretive, not lexical, and reflects a theological bias rather than linguistic evidence.
 |
 |
 |
No Injury vs. Injury: The Legal Distinction
The text continues: “yet there is no injury, he shall surely be fined… but if any harm follows, you shall give life for life.” The distinction is between cases in which the premature child is unharmed and those in which injury occurs either to the child or to the mother. The context does not limit the “harm” to the woman, as some translations have wrongly suggested; the masculine plural suffixes and the generality of the expression include either mother or child. Injury to either results in the lex talionis application—life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth.
Thus, if the child is born prematurely but survives without injury, the penalty is monetary compensation. If the child (or the mother) suffers harm or death, the punishment escalates proportionally—even to capital punishment if death occurs.
 |
 |
 |
Textual Variants and Ancient Witnesses
The Hebrew Masoretic Text (MT) reads “her children come out” (יְלָדֶיהָ). The Samaritan Pentateuch agrees with the MT. The Septuagint (LXX), however, renders: καὶ ἐξέλθῃ τὸ παιδίον αὐτῆς μὴ ἐξεικονισμένον (“and her child comes out not fully formed”), introducing the notion of miscarriage. This translation decision, likely influenced by Hellenistic medical categories, shifts the sense toward a spontaneous abortion. Philo and Josephus, reflecting on the LXX, also lean in this direction, showing how Second Temple Judaism could be influenced by Greek thought.
The Dead Sea Scrolls preserve no fragment of this passage, so we rely on MT, LXX, and Samaritan evidence. Given the clear Hebrew wording, the LXX appears to have paraphrased or reinterpreted to fit its cultural-linguistic context. Jerome’s Vulgate (4th century C.E.) similarly renders abortivum (“miscarriage”), reflecting LXX influence, and this in turn shaped Western tradition. Modern translations that follow “miscarriage” do so because of this interpretive history, not the Hebrew grammar.
 |
 |
 |
Legal and Ethical Implications
This text establishes two foundational points in biblical law:
-
The Unborn Are Considered Children. The use of yeled confirms that even in the womb, the developing human is regarded as a “child.” Hebrew had words for miscarriage (shakol, cf. Gen. 31:38; Hos. 9:14), yet Moses does not use them here. Instead, he uses the regular term for a living child.
-
Equal Protection Under Law. Injury or death to the child is treated on par with injury or death to the mother: “life for life.” The unborn, therefore, are granted full legal protection. This contradicts the claim that the Bible regards the fetus as less than human.
The law balances intent, circumstance, and consequence. If injury is accidental and non-lethal, the fine ensures responsibility but not vengeance. If harm results in death, the lex talionis principle applies. This mirrors Numbers 35:22–24, where deliberateness and intent are carefully distinguished in cases of manslaughter versus murder.
 |
 |
 |
Ancient Near Eastern Parallels
The Code of Hammurabi (§209–214) addresses a similar case: if a man strikes a woman and causes miscarriage, he pays a fine; if the woman dies, his daughter is put to death. Hammurabi distinguishes between loss of fetus and loss of adult life, reflecting a lower valuation of the unborn. Exodus 21, however, goes beyond Hammurabi by elevating the unborn child’s status to full personhood—life for life. This shows the distinct sanctity of life in Mosaic law, rooted in the imago Dei (Gen. 1:27).
The Broader Canonical Witness
Other passages underscore the personhood of the unborn:
-
Psalm 139:13–16: “You formed my inward parts; You knitted me together in my mother’s womb.”
-
Jeremiah 1:5: “Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you.”
-
Luke 1:41: The unborn John the Baptist leaps in Elizabeth’s womb at the presence of Mary and the unborn Messiah.
These confirm continuity of personhood from conception to birth, not a later “ensoulment.”
The horror expressed in passages condemning atrocities against pregnant women (Hos. 13:16; Amos 1:13; 2 Kings 8:12; 15:16) also reflects the biblical view that unborn life is sacred and its destruction heinous.
 |
 |
 |
Misuse of the Passage in Modern Abortion Debate
Those advocating abortion rights often cite mistranslations of this passage (miscarriage rendering) to argue that the Bible treats unborn life as less valuable. This misuse rests on faulty translation and disregard for the Hebrew text. The biblical law is not minimizing fetal life but protecting it—imposing fines only when premature birth occurs without injury. If injury or death occurs, the unborn life is valued equally with any other.
Dr. J. Glenn rightly summarized: “The viable embryo in the uterus IS a human individual, and therefore destroying it is a violation of the sixth commandment” (The Bible and Modern Medicine, 1963, p. 176). The command “you shall not murder” (Exod. 20:13) applies fully to unborn life.
 |
 |
 |
Conclusion of the Legal Principle
Exodus 21:22–25 affirms:
-
The unborn are “children,” fully human in God’s eyes.
-
Premature live birth, not miscarriage, is in view.
-
The law protects unborn life with the same penalties as postnatal life.
-
Translational distortions (miscarriage rendering) undermine the sanctity of life.
-
Biblical justice requires accountability, proportionality, and recognition of the unborn as image-bearers of Jehovah.
Thus, from Creation onward, every human life—from conception—is sacred and protected by God’s law. Deliberately inducing abortion is therefore not only morally wrong but a direct violation of God’s Word.
 |
 |
 |
You May Also Enjoy
Exodus 3:14 – Literal Rendering and Theological Implications of “I Will Be Who I Will Be”
About the Author
CLICK LINKED IMAGE TO VISIT ONLINE STORE
