Exegesis:

hoti etechthē humin sēmeron sōtēr ‘for there has been born for you today a saviour,’ or, ‘i.e. that there has been born for you today a saviour,’ preferably the latter. Thus interpreted the clause is epexegetic to charan megalēn in v. 10.

humin ‘for you’ dative of advantage, as usual in ancient proclamations of royal births (cf. Klostermann); there is no contradiction with panti tō laō (v. 10) ‘for all the people’ because the persons addressed represent all the people concerned.

sēmeron ‘today.’ According to Jewish time reckoning the day begins at sunset.

sōtēr ‘saviour,’ cf. on 1.47. Because of the subsequent relative clause hos estin Christos kurios ‘who is Messiah (and) Lord’ (see below), which serves to identify the sōtēr whose birth is announced, it is better to understand sōtēr not as a title but as an agent-noun.

hos estin Christos kurios ‘who is Messiah (and) Lord.’ The absence of a connective between Christos and kurios (for which see on 1.6) is awkward and has been variously explained: (1) Translator’s New Testament understands the words as a hendiadys (i.e. two words expressing together one idea) and translates “the Anointed Lord” (cf. Moffatt “the Lord messiah”); (2) New English Bible, La Sainte Bible: Nouvelle version Segond révisée and Zürcher Bibel interpret both words as titles, cf. “the Messiah, the Lord” (New English Bible); (3) Revised Standard Version and others understand Christos as a name and kurios as a title, cf. “Christ the Lord” (Revised Standard Version). As (2) meets with less difficulties than (1) and (3) there is reason to adopt it.

en polei Dauid ‘in the town of David,’ to be connected with etechthē ‘was born.’

Translation:

To you is born. In some receptor languages the translator is compelled to decide how the angels came to know the facts told. In Foe, which has six evidential aspect forms, the choice is between a form indicating a statement based on evidence the speaker has previously seen, and one indicating that the speaker describes something he can see going on; the latter is used here. Similarly in Huli a past active form is chosen, which indicates that the statement is not based on deduction but on known fact in which the speaker took part or which he saw going on. — In this position the dative of advantage is often difficult to express; hence shifts to, ‘you have received to-day a saviour, (who is) born in…,’ ‘born is your Saviour’ (Javanese, similarly Ekari).

This day, or, ‘today,’ ‘now,’ ‘at this time,’ or, ‘(in) this night’ (Kituba, Tboli, Batak Toba).

A Saviour, i.e. ‘One who saves you.’

Christ (also in 2.26; 3.15; 4.41; 9.20; 20.41; 22.67; 23.2, 35, 39; 24.26, 46). There is a strong tendency amongst translators to transliterate Gr. christos, both where it still is a noun or title, and where it already has become a proper name or nearly so. When that line is followed, the translator has only to consider how, and to what extent, the form of the name has to be adjusted to phonemic patterns of the receptor language, e.g. Kedays (Tboli), Kaditoti (Ekari, but later replaced by Keristus, as used in the language of prestige), Kerisitu (Tae’), Klisto (Kituba), Chitu (Chinese).

Other problems arise if one tries to translate the word, where it is to be taken as a noun or title (see Exegesis), cf. e.g. New English Bible, where (ho) christos is rendered by “the Messiah”, and once by “(God’s) Anointed” (23.35), or An American Translation, where “the Messiah” is used here and in v. 26, “an anointed (king)” in 23.2, and “(the) Christ” in all other passages. Working along this line the translator may have the choice of three alternatives. (1) In several languages ‘Messias,’ ‘Messiah’ (a borrowing by way of Gr. messias and Aramaic meshīhā from Hebrew māshiach ‘the anointed one’) has been taken over in the sense it had acquired amongst the Jews, i.e. a God-promised or God-sent saviour-king. In that case it is possible to use the word here, in the phonemic form already existent in the receptor language. (2) In languages spoken in predominantly Muslim areas, the term (al) masih may be known, going back to the form which māshiah or meshīhā took on in Arabic, where it was used by Mohammed in reference to Isa (Jesus) (e.g. Sura 3.45, 9.30f). This term has often been used to render ‘Christ’ (see e.g. the above mentioned list), on the assumption that the meaning of the borrowing and the original term are the same. This assumption, however, rather questionable in general, is especially so in this case, because in the Koran the word had fairly well lost its Old Testament meaning to become part of the name of Isa, the prophet of the Christians (see on 1.31). This may be the reason why in some receptor languages the rendering (al) masih, after having been used for some time, has been discarded afterwards, e.g. in Malay. (3) Apart from these renderings, which make use of terms originally foreign to the receptor language, attempts have been made to describe the concept in indigenous terms, e.g. ‘the anointed one,’ ‘the consecrated one,’ ‘the one God has inaugurated.’ A cultural equivalent found in one version is, ‘Son of heaven’; this interesting solution, however, is thought a questionable one by some translators, especially because of undesirable associations with mythological concepts such as the holy marriage of the god of heaven with mother earth.

The opinion of the present author is that, in all passages reflecting Messianic concepts current among the Jews of Jesus’ days, translation is preferable. In practice, however, transliteration will often have to prevail, e.g. because of existing tradition in the receptor language, or in a neighbouring language of prestige.

The Lord, see on 1.6, sub (b).

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.