By force of arms they will conquer Assyria: in Revised Standard Version the first two lines are parallel, but Good News Translation has again combined them into one and expressed the meaning in more general terms. By force of arms means “by using weapons.” In many languages the word for conquer would imply that weapons are used, and it may not be necessary to mention weapons in that context. However, a translator could mention weapons or arms in the context of ruling Assyria, and say something like “they will conquer Assyria and rule it by force of arms” or “… and their army will rule it.”
In this verse the use of “shepherd” in the meaning of “ruler” is continued but given an ironic sense. The kind of ruling referred to here will not be the gentle, helpful kind that “shepherd” suggests. This is brought out in New English Bible and Jerusalem Bible when they say the shepherds will “shepherd Assyria with the sword” instead of the usual rod and staff as mentioned in Psa 23.4. Revised Standard Version drops the figure of speech here and translates “they shall rule the land of Assyria with the sword.”
The meaning of this clause is repeated in parallel language in the next line, “the land of Nimrod with the drawn sword.” “The land of Nimrod” is another name for Assyria, since, according to the tradition of Gen 10.8-12, Nimrod was the founder of its capital city, Nineveh. Some languages may have a special term for someone in the distant past who founded a city, and it would be helpful to use such a term here. If a translation is to have cross references, a reference to Gen 10.8-12 should be included here.
The second part of verse 6 contains a further textual problem. The Hebrew text has the subject of the main verb in the singular (“thus shall he deliver us” King James Version, “He will deliver us” New International Version), but there is no singular noun in the context for the pronoun “he” to refer to. Several modern English translations change the Hebrew text to “they” instead of “he” and refer it to the leaders in the first part of the verse. Good News Translation for instance has they will save us from the Assyrians. Jerusalem Bible retains the singular pronoun and moves the second half of verse 6 to the end of the previous section, following the first sentence of verse 5: “He himself will be peace. He will deliver us from Assyria should it invade our country….” If this is done, the “he” will then refer to the ideal ruler whose coming the prophet speaks of there. (See comments below on the interpretation of this verse.) New American Bible avoids the problem by using a passive verb and saying “we shall be delivered.”
“They shall deliver us from the Assyrian” (Revised Standard Version) is followed by two parallel clauses that are very close in both form and meaning to those at the beginning of verse 5. Good News Translation again combines the parallel clauses into one, as it did in verse 5, and translates when they invade our territory. Whether this is understood as referring to the ideal ruler or to the strong leaders, translators should note that the last part of verse 6 does not refer to something that happens after the events of the first part of the verse. It does not mean that the Assyrians will invade the land of Israel after they have been conquered by the people of Israel, but it refers to the invasion mentioned in verse 5. It may be clearer to begin the second half of the verse with “and in this way they (or, he) will save us from the Assyrians.” Some translators may find it clearer to combine verses 5 and 6, in order to mention the ideas in the order in which they happen.
Although the meaning of the words in these two verses is fairly clear, it is very difficult to know what situation the prophet is referring to. There never was any historical occasion when it seemed even remotely possible that Israel or Judah would be able to conquer Assyria. Even the deliverance from the invasion of the Assyrian King Sennacherib in 701 B.C. was in no way due to the leaders of Judah. Some scholars think that in these verses Assyria is used as a code name for some later enemy kingdom such as Babylonia, Persia, or Greece. (Compare the way in which the name Babylon stands for the Roman Empire in Revelation 18.) Others suggest that Assyria here is a symbol for any world power that is hostile toward the Lord and his people. If the translator prefers this last understanding, it is probably better to take verses 2-6 together in one section and thus to adopt section divisions that are slightly different from those of Revised Standard Version and Good News Translation. This would have the effect of associating the miraculous conquest of Assyria in verse 6 with the coming of the ideal ruler in verses 2-4. This is quite an attractive possibility, and is followed by Knox in his translation and by McKeating and Allen in their commentaries. In any case if the last part of verse 6 is understood as referring to the ideal ruler of verses 2-4, a translator may need to use a noun (“this ruler” or something similar) rather than the pronoun “he,” to make this clear.
Quoted with permission from Clark, David J. et al. A Handbook on Micah. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1978, 1982, 1993. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .