Exodus21

Let's begin with a few definitions:

"strive" - to fight, to struggle.

"child" - the Hebrew word here is "hariy," which is also used in Genesis 17:10-17 to refer
to babies after birth. (Gen. 17:10 ~ "Every man-child among you shall be circumcised.")

"her fruit" - the Hebrew term used here is "yeled," literally meaning "fruits." This is a rare
word, related to a much more common word, "yaled," which means "to bear" or "to bring
forth." Typical examples of "yaled" include Genesis 20:7, where, after Abraham prays for
the barren household of a man named Abimelech, "they bare children," and First Kings
3:21, where a woman refers to "my son, whom I did bear."

"depart" - the Hebrew term used here is "yatsa," which means "to come out" as at birth. It
is used to describe a stillbirth in one passage, (Numbers 12:12) but this is not the usual
Hebrew term for a stillbirth or for a miscarriage (which would be "nephel" and "shakal").
In a nearby text (Exodus 23:26), "shakal" is used to refer to a miscarriage.

"mischief" - this generally means "damage" (Hebrew "acown").

Some interpreters claim that this passage does not give an unborn baby the same legal
recognition as the baby's mother. The reasoning goes like this: it is assumed that the
"mischief" involved refers to harm to the mother, not to the baby. In other words, they
would paraphase the first part of the passage something like this: "If men are fighting,
and hurt a pregnant woman, so that she has a miscarriage, but there is no further damage,
the guilty man shall surely be punished with a fine." The New American Standard Bible, in
the edition that is not updated, favored this interpretation.

However, as noted above, the Hebrew word for "miscarriage" is not used. The Hebrew
text gives no justification for adding the word "further." Also, there is no no textual
reason to assume that the damage consists only of damage to the mother. So a better
rendering would be as follows: "If men are fighting, and hurt a pregnant woman, causing
the child/children to come forth, but there is no further damage, the guilty man shall surely
be punished with a fine." The passage goes on to mean that, under the Old Testament
Law, if the baby were dead or injured, a proportionate punishment should be carried out.

Since the text does not use the usual Hebrew term for a miscarriage, it seems
inappropriate to assume that a miscarriage is being described. The text seems to
describe a live birth; it dictates that the mother is to be compensated for the extra duress
caused by the blow which initiated the delivery, and that the guilty man is to be punished
proportionately for any harm inflicted, whether to the mother or the child.

However, it should probably be noted that even if one interprets the passage the other
way, it implies little about the personhood of the baby. A few verses previously (in
Exodus 21:20-21), there is a law for the Israelites stating that if a slave-owner beats his
slave to death, the slave-owner must be punished -- but not necessarily on a life-for-life
scale. And if the slave survives for a day or two, and then dies, the slave-owner is not
punished (except by the loss of his slave, which he caused). This does not mean,
though, that the slave was therefore not a person. It only shows one of several areas in
the Old Testament in which God bore with imperfect human social structures when He
initiated His work of deliverance.