Izanaqi writes:
Where in those two versions does it state to wait to see what damage was done to the fetus. I challenge you to find in Exodus 21:22 the exact sequence of words that states to wait until birth to see what damage is done to the fetus and then to apply the fine.
im not interested in those two versions.
they are translations from the original... the translators could have it wrong. The original does not mention miscarriage it mentions the birth of the child
'and goes forth her child and is not injury'
I look at this verse and can see that the hebrew writer was focused on the baby and whether it was injured or not. The only way to know is to wait until the child 'goes forth' and then to determine if any injury had resulted.
Izaniqi writes:
They were only concerned if the man caused the woman to miscarry or if the woman received physical damage. If the woman miscarried but was otherwise unhurt, then the penalty would be a fine.
no for the reason stated above. the original writing is speaking about injury to the child, not the woman.
Under the mosaic law if the woman died, the one who struck her would have to pay the penalty of the law. In this case it is clear that the 'injury' being spoken of is to the unborn child, not the woman.
Izanaqi writes:
I challenge you to show me how you could interpret that passage in any other way.
by going to the original language you can see.
here is another translation which shows more correctly the Hebrew meaning:
quote:
And in case men should struggle with each other and they really hurt a pregnant woman and her children do come out but no fatal accident occurs, he is to have damages imposed upon him without fail according to what the owner of the woman may lay upon him; and he must give it through the justices. 23But if a fatal accident should occur, then you must give soul for soul
again, here is the original hebrew word for word (this time i've rearranged it left to right for you)
quote:
And when men contend and they strike a pregnant woman
and her CHILD GOES FORTH, injury NOT
surely he shall be fined as the husband of the woman may put upon him
and shall be given with the judges
And if injury IS, soul for soul thou shalt give
If you look carefully you'll see that if the CHILD GOES FORTH injured or not, the striker was still to be fined and go before the juges
if it turned out that the CHILD GOES FORTH injured, then soul for soul was the punishment.
Either way you look at it, the child is what the original writer had in mind, not the mother. Perhaps the later translators did not know ancient hebrew as well as we do today.
™ Version 4.2
