Exodus 21:22 · Bible study
Exodus 21:22 Commentary: The Value of Unborn Life in God’s Law
Hebrew · 8 what the commentators say
Meaning in one sentence
Exodus 21:22 examines a law protecting a pregnant woman and her unborn child. Does 'harm' include the fetus? Explore the legal principle and its implications.
Research Summary
- Meaning: A man who strikes a pregnant woman and causes a miscarriage must pay a fine if no permanent harm occurs; if harm occurs, the lex talionis applies.
- Key words: ’ason (harm, serious injury); yeladeha (her children, plural form often rendered “fruit”); ba’al ha’ishshah (the woman’s husband).
- Main debate: Does “harm” (’ason) in v.22 refer only to the mother, or does it also include the fetus? Commentators disagree.
- Theological theme: God’s law values human life from the womb, protects the vulnerable, and demands proportionate justice.
- Best use: Teach this passage when discussing the Bible’s view of unborn life, the justice of God’s law, or the protection of bystanders in conflict.
Translation Comparison
BSB Berean Standard Bible 2020
If men who are fighting strike a pregnant woman and her child is born prematurely, but there is no further injury, he shall surely be fined as the woman’s husband demands and as the court allows.
WEB World English Bible 2000
“If men fight and hurt a pregnant woman so that she gives birth prematurely, and yet no harm follows, he shall be surely fined as much as the woman’s husband demands and the judges allow.
KJV King James Version 1769
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.
ASV American Standard Version 1901
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.
YLT Young's Literal Translation 1898
`And when men strive, and have smitten a pregnant woman, and her children have come out, and there is no mischief, he is certainly fined, as the husband of the woman doth lay upon him, and he hath given through the judges;
Darby Darby Bible 1890
And if men strive together, and strike a woman with child, so that she be delivered, and no mischief happen, he shall in any case be fined, according as the woman's husband shall impose on him, and shall give it as the judges estimate.
Douay-Rheims Douay-Rheims Bible 1899
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.
Translations in other languages (10 available)
Si algunos riñeren, é hiriesen á mujer preñada, y ésta abortare, pero sin haber muerte, será penado|strong="H6064, H6064" conforme á lo que le impusiere el marido de la mujer y juzgaren los árbitros.
Se alguns brigarem, e ferissem a mulher grávida, e esta abortar, mas sem haver morte, será multado conforme o que lhe impuser o marido da mulher e julgarem os juízes.
Si des hommes se querellent, et qu’ ils heurtent une femme enceinte, et la fassent accoucher, sans autre accident, ils seront punis d’ une amende imposée par le mari de la femme, et qu’ ils paieront devant les juges.
Wenn Männer hadern und verletzen ein schwangeres Weib, daß ihr die Frucht abgeht, und ihr kein Schade widerfährt, so soll man ihn um Geld strafen, wieviel des Weibes Mann ihm auflegt, und er soll's geben nach der Schiedsrichter Erkennen.
Wanneer nu mannen kijven, en slaan een zwangere vrouw, dat haar de vrucht afgaat, doch geen dodelijk verderf zij, zo zal hij zekerlijk gestraft worden, gelijk als hem de man der vrouw oplegt, en hij zal het geven door de rechters.
Se alcuni vengono a rissa e percuotono una donna incinta sì ch’ella si sgravi, ma senza che ne segua altro danno, il percotitore sarà condannato all’ammenda che il marito della donna gl’imporrà; e la pagherà come determineranno i giudici;
Jeźliby się też powadziwszy mężowie, uderzył który z nich niewiastę brzemienną, tak żeby z niej płód wyszedł, jednakby nie zaszła śmierć koniecznie karanie odniesie, jakie włoży nań mąż onejże niewiasty, a da wedle uznania sędziów.
Когда дерутся люди, и ударят беременную женщину, и она выкинет, но не будет другого вреда, то взять с виновного пеню, какую наложит на него муж той женщины, и он должен заплатить оную при посредниках;
「人 若 彼此爭鬥，傷害 有孕 的婦人，甚至墜 胎，隨後卻無 別害，那傷害她的，總要 按婦人 的丈夫 所 要的，照審判官 所斷的，受罰。
If men, while fighting, do damage to a woman with child, causing the loss of the child, but no other evil comes to her, the man will have to make payment up to the amount fixed by her husband, in agreement with the decision of the judges.
Verse in Context
Original Language (Biblical Hebrew)
Old Testament · Biblical Hebrew · Exodus 21:22
Source: STEPBible TAGNT/TEHB (CC-BY 4.0). Click or tap a morphology code to see the full parsing.
Scholars' Consensus
Commentators agree that Exodus 21:22 addresses a specific scenario: two men fighting, one strikes a pregnant woman, and she miscarries. If no serious harm (’ason) follows, meaning no permanent injury or death, the striker pays a fine set by the husband and confirmed by judges. All sources see this law as establishing a graduated penalty, moving from monetary compensation to the full lex talionis when ’ason occurs (v.23, 25).
Calvin pushes the point: he argues that because the fetus is already a human being (homo), killing it through miscarriage is a capital crime. The Cambridge Bible notes that ’ason can refer to a fatal injury, likely to mother or child. Barnes sees the law as a wise protection for both life and property. Even those who restrict ’ason to the mother alone, such as some Jewish interpreters cited by Gill, agree that the miscarriage itself demands compensation.
How settled is the interpretation?
Interpretive difficulty: Medium
Main views:
- Harm only to mother: The context of v.22–23: 'if any harm follows' could link back only to the woman, and the plural 'children' (v.22) makes the fine for the lost offspring a property matter, not a life-for-life issue.
- Harm includes the fetus: Calvin and others point to the immediate transition to lex talionis in v.23. Since the woman presumably lived if no harm followed, the 'harm' that triggers death penalty must refer to fetal death. Also, the fetus is already a human being (homo).
What is clear: Both sides agree that causing a miscarriage demands compensation, and that intentional killing of the mother is a capital crime. The debate centers on whether fetal death itself qualifies as 'harm' under the lex talionis.
What Scholars Agree and Debate
| Topic | Agreed | Debated |
|---|---|---|
| Definition of 'harm' (אסון) in v.22 | All interpreters agree that if serious harm results, the lex talionis applies (v.23, 25). | Some (e.g., Jewish commentators cited by Gill, Targum Onkelos) restrict 'ason' to injury or death of the mother. Others (e.g., Calvin) argue it includes harm to the fetus, making feticide a capital crime. |
| The identity of the injured woman | She is the wife of one of the men, probably trying to separate the fighters (similar to Deut 25:11). | Could she be any woman, or specifically an Israelite? The text does not specify, but most assume an Israelite woman given the covenant context. |
| The role of the husband in setting the fine | The husband proposes the initial amount; the judges confirm or modify it. This protects against both under-compensation and exploitation. | Whether the husband acts as the injured party (losing potential offspring) or as the representative of the family. Both views see the child as having value to the family unit. |
| Continuity with modern abortion debate | The law grants the unborn child a distinct legal status worthy of compensation if lost. | Some argue that the graduated penalty (fine vs. death) shows the fetus has less value than the mother, while others (e.g., Calvin) argue that the penalty depends on whether the child was developed enough to survive, a distinction about viability, not intrinsic worth. |
Historical & Cultural Context
This case-law appears in the Covenant Code (Exodus 21, 23), a collection of judgments given to Israel after the Ten Commandments. The surrounding verses cover injuries from violence (21:18, 19), master-servant relations (21:20, 21, 26, 27), and dangerous animals (21:28, 32). Verse 22 likely imagines a wife intervening in a brawl, much like Deuteronomy 25:11.
Children were deeply valued in ancient Israel. Posterity was tied to God’s covenant promise (Genesis 15:5), and every family hoped the Messiah might descend from them. Adam Clarke notes that harming a pregnant woman was a grave offense because it threatened that promise. The law therefore gave the husband, representing the family, the right to set compensation, with judges ensuring fairness (Deuteronomy 16:18).
The Hebrew term ’ason (Strong's H0611) appears only here, in 21:23, and in Genesis 42, 44 (where Jacob fears harm to Benjamin). It means serious injury or death. The key interpretive question is whether it applies only to the woman, or also to the child. Archaeological parallels from the Code of Hammurabi (sections 209, 214) prescribe fines for causing miscarriage, but only a life-for-life penalty if the woman dies, suggesting a differing view of fetal life. Israel’s law raises the standard: Calvin argues the child in the womb is already human, so killing it merits death.
Textual Notes
The supplied sources note no significant manuscript variants for Exodus 21:22. The Cambridge Bible mentions Budde’s conjecture that the final word bililim (by/for judges) might originally have been bilim (for the untimely birth), but this is speculative and not supported by the Masoretic text. The standard Hebrew reading is stable.
Reception History
Jewish tradition (Mishnah, Talmud) discusses this law in tractate Bava Kamma. The rabbis generally interpreted ’ason as injury to the woman only, so that the fine compensated for the lost child as property. Early Christian interpreters, such as Augustine and later Calvin, read the passage as protecting the fetus as a human being. Calvin explicitly argued that destroying the foetus is “almost a monstrous crime” because it robs a human of life before it can enjoy it. In the Reformation, this verse was used to counter arguments that abortion was not homicide. Modern discussions continue these same lines, some see the fine as evidence of lesser value, others see the graduated penalty as a wise recognition of different harms.
Preaching This Verse
Three-point outline
- The setting: conflict and unintended victim. The woman is caught in a fight she never chose. The law protects bystanders, especially the vulnerable.
- The graduated penalty: from fine to life-for-life. God values life at every stage. A miscarriage without permanent harm still demands compensation. But when ’ason occurs, justice intensifies.
- The role of the community: husband and judges. Justice is not left to private vengeance. The husband proposes a fine; judges confirm it. The system protects both the victim and the accused from arbitrary demands.
Five-point outline
- Context: the Covenant Code applies God’s moral law to everyday conflicts.
- The incident: a pregnant woman is struck and miscarries.
- The first scenario: no lasting harm, a fine is imposed.
- The second scenario: ’ason follows, the lex talionis (eye for eye) becomes the standard.
- The principle: human life in the womb is worthy of legal protection.
Illustration hooks
- A driver runs a red light, hits a pedestrian. The victim’s injuries are minor. Should the driver pay only a ticket? Or compensate for lost work, pain, and the risk of worse? Our intuitions about proportional justice echo this law.
- A schoolyard scuffle escalates; a teacher intervenes and gets hurt. The principal has rules for minor injuries and a separate process for serious ones. This law works the same way.
Questions your congregation is asking
- Does the Bible actually say something about the value of unborn life? This verse is one of the clearest places.
- Why does the law involve the husband and judges? Because justice must be public, not driven by private anger.
- If killing a fetus is not automatically a capital crime under this law (if ’ason only refers to the mother), does that mean the Bible values the unborn less? This is the very debate the verse raises.
Leading a Discussion
This passage shows God’s concern for the vulnerable and His insistence on proportional justice. Read Exodus 21:22, 25 together. Notice how the law moves from a predictable fine to the severe lex talionis, but only when real harm occurs.
Discussion questions
- What does the phrase “her children come out” (Hebrew plural yeladeha) suggest about how the law viewed a miscarriage?
- Why do you think the husband is given the first say in setting the fine? What does that show about family structure in ancient Israel?
- How do the commentaries differ on the meaning of ’ason (harm)? Which reading seems most persuasive to you? Why?
- If ’ason includes harm to the fetus (as Calvin argued), what implications does that have for how Christians think about abortion today?
- How does this law reflect the principle that punishment should fit the crime? Contrast it with the surrounding laws about slaves and oxen.
- In what ways does this passage challenge a culture that treats accidental harm to the unborn as trivial?
- How can our church community better value and protect the vulnerable, both born and unborn?
Word Study
The key original-language words in this verse. Select any word for its full lexicon entry — meaning, every occurrence in Scripture, and related words.
Cross-References
Source: Treasury of Scripture Knowledge (TSK, public domain)
| Exodus 21:30 | If a ransom is imposed on him, then he shall give for the redemption of his life whatever is imposed. |
| Deuteronomy 16:18 | You shall make judges and officers in all your gates, which Yahweh your God gives you, according to your tribes; and they shall judge the people with righteous judgment. |
| Deuteronomy 22:18 | The elders of that city shall take the man and chastise him. |
| Deuteronomy 22:19 | They shall fine him one hundred shekels of silver, and give them to the father of the young lady, because he has given a bad name to a virgin of Israel. She shall be his wife. He may not put her away all his days. |
Interlinear and lexical data from STEPBible (CC BY 4.0). Cross-reference data from OpenBible.info (CC BY 4.0). Commentaries are public domain.
For personal reflection
Read the devotional page — prayer, application, and "for families"
What the Commentators Say
7 public-domain commentaries, condensed into plain language.
Adam Clarke's Commentary Methodist/Wesleyan 1826
Clarke explains that Jewish families valued unborn children so highly because each hoped the Messiah might descend from their lineage. An injury to a pregnant woman was therefore a grave offense against the husband, who decided the penalty if no permanent harm resulted. But if the child or mother died, it was treated as murder and the offender was executed.
Barnes' Notes on the Bible Protestant 1832
Barnes treats the eye-for-eye rule as a judicial guideline for setting fair compensation, not a command for personal vengeance. He argues that Jesus quoted it to expose how the Pharisees confused the law's civil purpose with the believer's inner life. The law protects the community, but a Christian's heart is called to forgiveness.
Calvin's Commentaries Reformed 1564
Calvin argues that the fetus is already a human being, so killing it is a monstrous crime. He insists the law applies death as punishment not only if the mother dies but also if the child is killed before or shortly after birth. The money payment is compensation for loss, not a price for the child's life.
Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges Anglican 1880
The Cambridge Bible notes that the Hebrew phrase for her fruit depart literally means her children come forth, indicating a generic plural. The commentator suggests the penalty is a fine for the loss of unborn children, who were considered the parents property. The mention of arbitrators is likely a scribal error, with the original probably reading he shall pay it for the untimely birth.
Geneva Bible Notes Reformed 1599
The Geneva note highlights the unique legal process when a miscarriage occurs but the woman survives. The husband may set the penalty, but the judges also have authority to determine the payment. This balances the injured family's rights with civil oversight.
Gill's Exposition of the Bible Baptist 1748
Gill draws a careful legal distinction: if a blow to a pregnant woman causes premature birth but no death or lasting harm to mother or child, the offender pays a fine. The husband proposes the amount, but if disputed the judges set it. Compensation covers the value of the birth plus injury and pain.
Lange's Commentary Reformed 1857
Lange argues that these civil laws are not primarily a criminal code but a system designed to train Israel for freedom. He highlights that the section begins with emancipation regulations, signaling that personal liberty is the central concern, and that slavery as an existing institution is transformed within the theocracy's educational purpose.