What is the proper translation of Exodus 21:22-23?

Question

If translated one way it makes a fetus seem like it is not a human being worthy of punishment if taken unjustly. If translated another way it fully seems to indicate the unborn are not only human but also deserves the same punishments if taken unjustly as a born person who also suffered the fate of manslaughter.

Just to let you know, not that it really matters, I am Pro-Life and no, surprisingly I am not a Christian. Christians however have often been the champions of this issue and I applaud them for there efforts. However I believe it is important they are in accord with there scriptural passages so as not to create any unnecessary inner conflicts.

slickyboy40, are you a student of ancient hebrew, greek, and Latin, as these were the first languages bible were translated from and into before obtaining the present form we have today. I know from my religious studies education that translational differences can manifest often in conflictual interpretations. Even one words can completely change a passage.

Martin S, thank you for enlightening me that the fruit departed could simply be a premature live birth, yet if that birth had resulted in death, then death is the prescribed punishment same as other born manslaughters.

Carol M, the no mischief following could be interpreted as the mother not dying not the child. But as another poster pointed out it could be the difference between a premature alive birth and a miscarriage. That i would believe is the more functional interpretation.

Can any see the huge potential interpretive differences between these two translations?

"If men quarrel, and one strike a woman with child, and she miscarry indeed, but live herself: he shall be answerable for so much damage as the woman's husband shall require, and as arbiters shall award. But if her death ensue thereupon, he shall render life for life."

Exodus 21:22 And if men strive together, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart, and yet no harm follow, he shall be surely fined, according as the woman's husband shall lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine. 23 But if any harm follow, then thou shalt give life for life,

Vanessa E, that is the translation I would like to believe the majority of but it is apparent most posters are not familiar with biblical criticism. Assuming the text has not been altered there will always be translational issues. Scholars can tweak a word here or there in such a way as to skew the possible interpretations in one direction or another. Again I am Pro-Life but it also is important for any religious adherent to understand the difficulties of translation.

"(22)Now suppose two people are fighting, and in the process, they hurt a pregnant woman so her child is born prematurely. If no further harm results, then the person responsible must pay damages in the amount the woman's husband demands and the judges approve. (23) But if any harm results, then the offender must be punished according to the injury. If the result is death, the offender must be executed." New Living Translation

Compare this verse to the two other translations I posted in my details. You can see the obvious interpretive differences.

aardvark5751, key word opinion in which now there are several different translations and interpretations of the same passage.

Grandreal, I believe you can me an interpretation not the translation you believe correct based off of knowledgeable study.

Answer 1

Define "proper translation"!
You can put 10 different biblical scholars in a room & none would agree upon what a proper translation was........

Answer 2

The most recent, and considered the most accurate, translation of the Bible is the New Living Translation (NLT) by Tyndale House. Basically a team of hundreds of biblical scholars, both Christian and not, as well as hundreds of translators and stylists were employed to create an accurate and yet flowing text. This translation was made from the original text, not from another translation. In any case in the NLT it reads: "(22)Now suppose two people are fighting, and in the process, they hurt a pregnant woman so her child is born prematurely. If no further harm results, then the person responsible must pay damages in the amount the woman's husband demands and the judges approve. (23) But if any harm results, then the offender must be punished according to the injury. If the result is death, the offender must be executed." Basically if the child is born prematurely but lives then the offender must pay a sum, but if any damage comes to the child or mother, the punishment is greater, in the case of death then death. At this point the an eye for an eye rule applies, if you were to read the next few verses. NLT also suggests the use of Psalm 82:3-4, Psalm 127:3, Psalm 139:13-16 and Jeremiah 1:5 as arguments against abortion as well as the Exodus 21:22-25 passage.

Answer 3

Okay...let's take a look at that Torah portion in Shemot - Exodus:

22.
And should men quarrel and hit a pregnant woman, and she miscarries but there is no fatality, he shall surely be punished, when the woman's husband makes demands of him, and he shall give [restitution] according to the judges' [orders].

23.
But if there is a fatality, you shall give a life for a life,

Now, I went to the link below to learn what the Rabbis had to say about these verses.
Their interpretation seems to be about restitution for any harm caused.

It doesn't really address the pro-choice or pro-life agenda.
The problem stems from people who misread or interject their own opinion/interpretation into Biblical verse.

Since many Christian leaders tend to ignore the so-called Old Testament (unless it suits their purpose), it would be wise for you to consult with a learned Rabbi who has studied Torah and get an informed answer to your question.

Answer 4

Exodus 21:21-23 Notwithstanding, if he continue a day or two, he shall not be punished: for he is his money.

22 If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her, and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman's husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine.

That is saying no abortions because punnishment for that act against a pregnant woman is certain. Where did you get that other interpretation?

Answer 5

It helps if you post the passage, brother.

"If men quarrel, and one strike a woman with child, and she miscarry indeed, but live herself: he shall be answerable for so much damage as the woman's husband shall require, and as arbiters shall award. But if her death ensue thereupon, he shall render life for life."

You are correct in saying that there may be some serious "the kid doesn't matter" implications in there. However, this is my take on it:
The husband and wife are the ones who created (not infused with a soul, that is reserved for God) the life in the woman's womb. Thus, it belongs to them. The husband is the legal owner of the woman (at the time, this was common) and all other belongings in the house. Thus, the husband had legal authority to demand payment for the loss of what is his.

When I see a scripture passage like this, though, which leaves the question so open and vague, I like to turn to other parts of the Bible for verification.

Psalm 51:5: "Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me."

Judges 13:2-5: "A certain man of Zorah, named Manoah, from the clan of the Danites, had a wife who was sterile and remained childless. The angel of the LORD appeared to her and said, "You are sterile and childless, but you are going to conceive and have a son. Now see to it that you drink no wine or other fermented drink and that you do not eat anything unclean, because you will conceive and give birth to a son. No razor may be used on his head, because the boy is to be a Nazirite, set apart to God from birth, and he will begin the deliverance of Israel from the hands of the Philistines."
(we see the unborn consecrated)

I hope this helps.

Answer 6

Exd 21:22 ¶ If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart [from her], and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman's husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges [determine].


Exd 21:23 And if [any] mischief follow, then thou shalt give life for life,

No Translation Neccessary, seems clear, That was the Law.

Answer 7

If men quarrel, and one strike a woman with child, and she miscarry indeed, but live herself: he shall be answerable for so much damage as the woman's husband shall require, and as arbiters shall award. But if her death ensue thereupon, he shall render life for life." is correct. I'm not an expert on Hebrew, but this is the opinion of all of the early Jewish commentators, who were. Abortion is a sin, but not a capital one.

Answer 8

The new world translation was translated by 5 men and only one had some college training, 3 had not graduated from high school and none were Bible scholars. It is rumored that one was a spirit medium. What do you think? The words have been altered to match the cults erroneous teachings that have never come true. The NIV was translated by 100 men from various religions and they were Bible scholars.

Answer 9

Here's the Jewish Publication Society's translation.

Exodus 21:22 And if men strive together, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart, and yet no harm follow, he shall be surely fined, according as the woman's husband shall lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine. 23 But if any harm follow, then thou shalt give life for life,

Here's the English Standard Version translation.

Exodus 21:22 "When men strive together and hit a pregnant woman, so that her children come out, but there is no harm, the one who hit her shall surely be fined, as the woman's husband shall impose on him, and he shall pay as the judges determine. 23 But if there is harm, then you shall pay life for life, 24 eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot,

In other words if there is a fight going on and a pregnant woman gets hit and her child comes out and dies then the person who did it is to be killed for being the cause of death in the case of the unborn infant.

Answer 10

Your "inner confilct" concern and wanting to help Christians is well-spirited but misplaced.

One great thing about being a Christian is that only you, in your own heart, translate a passage for yourself. You should never ask anyone else. If you need help or don't understand that archaic language/structure in which the bible was written you should consult your local clergy. They would be more than happy to discuss.

It doesn't matter if someone wants to twist or translate any bible passage to thier liking.

Answer 11

Well, I don't use religion to support my belief that abortion-on-demand is wrong, immoral, and something that will weigh heavily upon the woman as she continues her own life after denying life to another. I can't imagine that the Bible would leave one with an impression that an unborn child wasn't worthy of the same consideration as one that had been born.