Exegesis:
sōtērian ex echthrōn hēmōn ‘salvation from our enemies.’ sōtērian, in the accusative, may be interpreted in different ways: (1) as the object of elalēsen in v. 70, cf. New English Bible; (2) as an apposition to keras sōtērias in v. 69, or to the whole clause of that verse; (2) is to be preferred. The phrase may be explicative (as brought out by those translators who keep the appositional construction, cf. Twentieth Century New Testament, La Sainte Bible: Nouvelle version Segond révisée), or predicative, i.e. indicating the purpose of v. 69 (as brought out by a shift to an infinitive of purpose, cf. An American Translation, Translator’s New Testament).
echthros ‘enemy’; in the present context the reference is to the enemies of the people of Israel.
ek cheiros pantōn tōn misountōn hēmas ‘from the hand of all that hate us.’
ek cheiros ‘from the hand,’ i.e. ‘from the power’ (The Modern Speech New Testament).
miseō ‘to hate,’ here with the accusative of the person whom one hates. The phrase is parallel to echthrōn and therefore to be understood in the same sense.
Translation:
If this verse has to be rendered as a new sentence the connexion with what precedes has to be clarified, e.g. by saying, ‘His aim was that we should be saved…,’ or (using terms that echo the renderings of “raised up” and “horn” in v. 69b), ‘this hero appeared to save us…,’ ‘this token was established that we should be saved….’ When the other interpretation (sotēria as object of elalēsen) is preferred, it may be better to introduce v. 71 by a form of ‘to say,’ e.g. ‘saying that we…,’ or, beginning a new sentence, ‘He (i.e. God) said that he would save us,’ or, ‘They said that God would save us.’ For to save see on “saviour” in 1.47.
From and from the hand (or, power/might) of, are virtually synonymous here, cf. ‘from the power of … from the hand of’ (Leyden), “from … from” (Phillips).
Our enemies, or ‘our adversaries,’ ‘those who fight us.’ Sometimes a term built on the verb ‘to hate’ is used for ‘enemy,’ e.g. in Lahu, Apache; cf. also ‘professional hater’ (Punu). Elsewhere the aspect of reciprocity has to be made explicit.
Who hate us. The verb expresses aversion coupled with enmity or malice. Some languages can describe the concept by the negation of its opposite, ‘who do not love/like us’ (cf. e.g. Ekari), others use idiomatic phrases such as, ‘who cannot see us in the eye (i.e. who cannot stand us at any price)’ (Sranan Tongo), ‘the ones with swelling jugular vein (because of suppressed anger)’ (Uab Meto). If the preceding term already contains the verb ‘to hate’ the translator will have to use a synonymous expression in order to avoid repetition, e.g. ‘the lazy to look at us’ (i.e. ‘the ones who can’t stand the sight of us’) (Lahu), ‘those who would ruin us’ (Apache).
Quoted with permission from Reiling, J. and Swellengrebel, J.L. A Handbook on the Gospel of Luke. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1971. For this and other handbooks for translators see here . Make sure to also consult the Handbook on the Gospel of Mark for parallel or similar verses.