Does the Bible grant full personhood to the unborn? Some modern scholars argue that it does not—and that even key legal texts in the Old Testament fail to protect unborn life. In this video, I examine that claim by engaging directly with Exodus 21:22–25, one of the most frequently cited passages in the debate.Responding to arguments made by Dan McClellan, I walk through the text carefully and show that the common critical reading depends on grammatical and contextual mistakes. The passage does not describe a miscarriage followed by harm to the mother. Rather, it contrasts two outcomes related to the child: premature birth without harm, and injury or death to the child—each with corresponding penalties.I explain why the grammar of the Hebrew text requires this reading, why the Septuagint (LXX) confirms it, and why appeals to Ancient Near Eastern law codes fail to override the Bible’s own self-understanding as divinely revealed and morally distinct. Special attention is given to the first appearance of lex talionis (“eye for eye, tooth for tooth”) in Scripture—and why its initial use is so theologically significant.When read correctly, Exodus 21:22–25 teaches that unborn children possess full legal and moral personhood under God’s law. The implications are unavoidable: the taking of unborn life is a violation of the sixth commandment. The final question, then, is not merely exegetical but moral and spiritual—how will we respond to what Scripture clearly teaches?#Exodus2122 #BiblicalEthics #ProLife #AbortionDebate #OldTestamentLaw #BiblicalTheology #LexTalionis #UnbornLife #ChristianApologetics