Hall of Fame
I said, "considering what Knight points out in regards to Exodus 21:22" in order to draw your attention to what Knight points out in regards to Exodus 21:22. I think he covered it pretty well. If you disagree, you can always explain where and why.Harm? To whom?
To the mother or to the child?
They speak of "give birth prematurely", not "miscarry". I can only assume that the choice of words by the translator is deliberate, because a premature birth and a miscarriage are different things.
If "harm" refers to the mother, the child isn't even taken in consideration by the Bible.
If "harm" refers to the child, it gets tricky. A premature birth "harms" the child whether he survives the ordeal or not (though it's more harmful if the child doesn't, obviously).
Then why make note of what "many medieval church fathers" thought? As a protestant Christian I don't really care what they thought, nor would I expect many other Christians to. Their arguments might be persuasive but you haven't presented any. I assume then you believe simply their declaring this would be persuasive of itself. If you're not sure what the biblical position on abortion is, then why present something you think will persuade one way or the other? That strikes me as pretty dishonest.There's a lot of scholastic exegesis of this particular verse. I'm not sure.