Santaclausowitz, even ancient Jewish scholars were not of one mind about that passage. The Septuagint translates it as clearly about the foetus and (from my cursory research) also adds, by mistranslation, a distinction not present between "formed" and "unformed" foetuses. The Septuagint, too, was by ancient scholars. So big a Jewish philosopher as Philo accepted the interpretation as about harm to the foetus. ( http://caae.phil.cmu.edu/cavalier/Forum/abortion/background/judaism1.html ).
Similarly, killing a foetus was considered a capital crime at one place even in the Talmud, Sanhedrin 57b.
So it's true that the rabinnic traditions now accepted by Judaism as most relevant accept your interpretation, but it is also true that there was disagreement at the relevant time, among Jewish scholars. And to say that Christianity came from Judaism is slightly deceptive. It's certainly true if by Judaism one means first-century (and prior) Judaism, but certainly there is no presumption by Christians that the rabbis recognized by later/modern-day Judaism as controlling were, in fact, controlling.
So anyway, I think that actually what's true is that that passage is hard to exegete perfectly now, and it was hard thousands of years ago, too.
WTA Non Anon Gunboat
buy in, 24hrs/turn, starts in 3 days
)
)
)
)