◀ All Reading Plans / Revised Common Lectionary (Complementary) / Psalm 17:1-9 (Keep me as the apple of your eye); Exodus 3:13-20 (God appears to Moses); Luke 20:1-8 (Jesus’ teaching authority) (New English Translation)

Prev Day

November 8, 2025

Next Day

Use the calendar to view readings from this devotional.

November 2025
Su	Mo	Tu	We	Th	Fr	Sa
						1
2	3	4	5	6	7	8
9	10	11	12	13	14	15
16	17	18	19	20	21	22
23	24	25	26	27	28	29
30

Return to today's reading

Revised Common Lectionary (Complementary)

Daily Bible readings that follow the church liturgical year, with thematically matched Old and New Testament readings.

Duration: 1245 days

Psalm 17:1-9

Psalm 17^[a]

A prayer of David.

17 Lord, consider my just cause.^[b]
Pay attention to my cry for help.
Listen to the prayer
I sincerely offer.^[c]
²Make a just decision on my behalf.^[d]
Decide what is right.^[e]
³You have scrutinized my inner motives;^[f]
you have examined me during the night.^[g]
You have carefully evaluated me, but you find no sin.
I am determined I will say nothing sinful.^[h]
⁴As for the actions of people^[i]—
just as you have commanded,
I have not followed in the footsteps of violent men.^[j]
⁵I carefully obey your commands;^[k]
I do not deviate from them.^[l]
⁶I call to you because you will answer me, O God.
Listen to me!^[m]
Hear what I say!^[n]
⁷Accomplish awesome, faithful deeds,^[o]
you who powerfully deliver those who look to you for protection from their enemies.^[p]
⁸Protect me as you would protect the pupil of your eye.^[q]
Hide me in the shadow of your wings.^[r]
⁹Protect me from^[s] the wicked men who attack^[t] me,
my enemies who crowd around me for the kill.^[u]

Footnotes

Psalm 17:1 sn Psalm 17. The psalmist asks God to intervene on his behalf because his life is threatened by dangerous enemies. He appeals to divine justice, for he is certain of his own innocence. Because he is innocent, he expects to encounter God and receive an assuring word.
Psalm 17:1 tn Heb “hear, Lord, what is just.”
Psalm 17:1 tn Heb “Listen to my prayer, [made] without lips of deceit.”
Psalm 17:2 tn Heb “From before you may my justice come out.” The prefixed verbal form יָצָא (yatsaʾ) could be taken as an imperfect, but following the imperatives in v. 1, it is better understood as a jussive of prayer.
Psalm 17:2 tn Heb “May your eyes look at what is right.” The prefixed verbal form is understood as jussive. (See also the preceding note on the word “behalf.”)
Psalm 17:3 tn Heb “you tested my heart.”
Psalm 17:3 tn Heb “you visited [at] night.”
Psalm 17:3 tc Heb “you tested me, you do not find, I plan, my mouth will not cross over.” The Hebrew verbal form זַמֹּתִי (zammoti) is a Qal perfect, first person singular from the root זָמַם (zamam, “plan, plan evil”). Some emend the form to a suffixed form of the noun, זִמָּתִי (zimmati, “my plan/evil plan”), and take it as the object of the preceding verb “find.” However, the suffix seems odd, since the psalmist is denying that he has any wrong thoughts. If one takes the form with what precedes, it might make better sense to read זִמּוֹת (zimmot, “evil plans”). However, this emendation leaves an unclear connection with the next line. The present translation maintains the verbal form found in the MT and understands it in a neutral sense, “I have decided” (see Jer 4:28). The words “my mouth will not cross over” (i.e., “transgress, sin”) can then be taken as a noun clause functioning as the object of the verb.
Psalm 17:4 tn Heb “with regard to the deeds of man[kind].”
Psalm 17:4 tn Heb “by the word of your lips, I, I have watched the paths of the violent” (i.e., “watched” in the sense of “watched for the purpose of avoiding”).
Psalm 17:5 tn Heb “my steps stay firm in your tracks.” The infinitive absolute functions here as a finite verb (see GKC 347 §113.gg). God’s “tracks” are his commands, i.e., the moral pathways he has prescribed for the psalmist.
Psalm 17:5 tn Heb “my footsteps do not stagger.”
Psalm 17:6 tn Heb “Turn your ear toward me.”
Psalm 17:6 tn Heb “my word.”
Psalm 17:7 tn Heb “Set apart faithful acts.”
Psalm 17:7 tn Heb “[O] one who delivers those who seek shelter from the ones raising themselves up, by your right hand.” The Lord’s “right hand” here symbolizes his power to protect and deliver.sn Those who look to you for protection from their enemies. “Seeking shelter” in the Lord is an idiom for seeking his protection. Seeking his protection presupposes and even demonstrates the subject’s loyalty to the Lord. In the psalms those who “take shelter” in the Lord are contrasted with the wicked and equated with those who love, fear and serve the Lord (Pss 5:11-12; 31:17-20; 34:21-22).
Psalm 17:8 tc Heb “Protect me like the pupil, a daughter of an eye.” The noun בַּת (bat, “daughter”) should probably be emended to בָּבַת (bavat, “pupil”). See Zech 2:12 HT (2:8 ET) and HALOT 107 s.v. *בָּבָה.
Psalm 17:8 sn Your wings. The metaphor compares God to a protective mother bird.
Psalm 17:9 tn Heb “from before”; or “because.” In the Hebrew text v. 9 is subordinated to v. 8. The words “protect me” are supplied in the translation for stylistic reasons.
Psalm 17:9 tn Heb “destroy.” The psalmist uses the perfect verbal form to emphasize the degree of danger. He describes the wicked as being already in the process of destroying him.
Psalm 17:9 tn Heb “my enemies, at the risk of life they surround me.” The Hebrew phrase בְּנֶפֶשׁ (b^enefesh) sometimes has the nuance “at the risk of [one’s] life” (see 1 Kgs 2:23; Prov 7:23; Lam 5:9).

Exodus 3:13-20

¹³Moses said^[a] to God, “If^[b] I go to the Israelites and tell them, ‘The God of your fathers has sent me to you,’ and they ask me, ‘What is his name?’^[c]—what should I say^[d] to them?”

¹⁴God said to Moses, “I AM that I AM.”^[e] And he said, “You must say this^[f] to the Israelites, ‘I AM has sent me to you.’” ¹⁵God also said to Moses, “You must say this to the Israelites, ‘The Lord^[g]—the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob—has sent me to you. This is my name^[h] forever, and this is my memorial from generation to generation.’^[i]

¹⁶“Go and bring together^[j] the elders of Israel and tell them, ‘The Lord, the God of your fathers,^[k] appeared^[l] to me—the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob—saying, “I have attended carefully to^[m] you and to what has been done^[n] to you in Egypt, ¹⁷and I have promised^[o] that I will bring you up out of the affliction of Egypt to the land of the Canaanites, Hittites, Amorites, Perizzites, Hivites, and Jebusites,^[p] to a land flowing with milk and honey.”’

¹⁸“The elders^[q] will listen^[r] to you, and then you and the elders of Israel must go to the king of Egypt and tell him, ‘The Lord, the God of the Hebrews, has met^[s] with us. So now, let us go^[t] three days’ journey into the wilderness, so that we may sacrifice^[u] to the Lord our God.’ ¹⁹But I know that the king of Egypt will not let you go,^[v] not even under force.^[w] ²⁰So I will extend my hand^[x] and strike Egypt with all my wonders^[y] that I will do among them, and after that he will release you.^[z]

Footnotes

Exodus 3:13 tn Heb “And Moses said.”
Exodus 3:13 tn The particle הִנֵּה (hinneh) in this clause introduces the foundation for what comes later—the question. Moses is saying, “Suppose I do all this and they ask this question—what should I say?”
Exodus 3:13 sn There has been considerable debate about the name of Yahweh in the Pentateuch, primarily because of theories that have maintained that the name Yahweh was not known in antiquity (see also 6:3 and notes there). The argument of this whole section nullifies that view. The idea that God’s name was revealed only here raises the question of what he was called earlier. The word “God” is not a name. “El Shaddai” is used only a few times in Genesis. But Israel would not have had a nameless deity—especially since Genesis says that from the very beginning people were making proclamation of the name of Yahweh (Gen 4:26; 12:8). It is possible that they did not always need a name if they were convinced that only he existed and there was no other God. But probably what Moses was anticipating was the Israelites’ wanting to be sure that Moses came with a message from their God, and that some sign could prove it. They would have known his name (Yahweh), and they would have known the ways that he had manifested himself. It would do no good for Moses to come with a new name for God, for that would be like introducing them to a new God. That would in no way authenticate to them Moses’ call, only confuse; after all, they would not be expecting a new name—they had been praying to their covenant God all along. They would want to be sure that their covenant God actually had sent Moses. To satisfy the Israelites Moses would have had to have been familiar with the name Yahweh—as they were—and know that he appeared to individuals. They would also want to know if Yahweh had sent Moses, how this was going to work in their deliverance, because they had been crying to him for deliverance. As it turned out, the Israelites had less problem with this than Moses anticipated—they were delighted when he came. It is likely that much of this concern was Moses’ own need for assurance that this was indeed the God of the fathers and that the promised deliverance was now to take place.
Exodus 3:13 tn The imperfect tense here has a deliberative nuance (“should”), for Moses is wondering what would be best to say when the Israelites want proof of the calling.
Exodus 3:14 tn The verb form used here is אֶהְיֶה (ʾehyeh), the Qal imperfect, first person common singular, of the verb הָיָה (hayah, “to be”). It forms an excellent paronomasia with the name. So when God used the verb to express his name, he used this form saying, “I am.” When his people refer to him as Yahweh, which is the third person masculine singular form of the same verb, they say “he is.” Some commentators argue for a future tense translation, “I will be who I will be,” because the verb has an active quality about it, and the Israelites lived in the light of the promises for the future. They argue that “I am” would be of little help to the Israelites in bondage. But a translation of “I will be” does not effectively do much more except restrict it to the future. The idea of the verb would certainly indicate that God is not bound by time, and while he is present (“I am”) he will always be present, even in the future, and so “I am” would embrace that as well (see also Ruth 2:13; Ps 50:21; Hos 1:9). The Greek translation of the OT used a participle to capture the idea, and several times in the Gospels Jesus used the powerful “I am” with this significance (e.g., John 8:58). The point is that Yahweh is sovereignly independent of all creation and that his presence guarantees the fulfillment of the covenant (cf. Isa 41:4; 42:6, 8; 43:10-11; 44:6; 45:5-7). Others argue for a causative Hiphil translation of “I will cause to be,” but nowhere in the Bible does this verb appear in Hiphil or Piel. A good summary of the views can be found in G. H. Parke-Taylor, Yahweh, the Divine Name in the Bible. See among the many articles: B. Beitzel, “Exodus 3:14 and the Divine Name: A Case of Biblical Paronomasia,” TJ 1 (1980): 5-20; C. D. Isbell, “The Divine Name ehyeh as a Symbol of Presence in Israelite Tradition,” HAR 2 (1978): 101-18; J. G. Janzen, “What’s in a Name? Yahweh in Exodus 3 and the Wider Biblical Context,” Int 33 (1979): 227-39; J. R. Lundbom, “God’s Use of the Idem per Idem to Terminate Debate,” HTR 71 (1978): 193-201; A. R. Millard, “Yw and Yhw Names,” VT 30 (1980): 208-12; and R. Youngblood, “A New Occurrence of the Divine Name ‘I AM,’” JETS 15 (1972): 144-52.
Exodus 3:14 tn Or “Thus you shall say” (also in the following verse). The word “must” in the translation conveys the instructional and imperatival force of the statement.
Exodus 3:15 sn Heb “Yahweh,” traditionally rendered “the Lord.” First the verb “I AM” was used (v. 14) in place of the name to indicate its meaning and to remind Moses of God’s promise to be with him (v. 12). Now in v. 15 the actual name is used for clear identification: “Yahweh…has sent me.” This is the name that the patriarchs invoked and proclaimed in the land of Canaan.
Exodus 3:15 sn The words “name” and “memorial” are at the heart of the two parallel clauses that form a poetic pair. The Hebrew word “remembrance” is a poetical synonym for “name” (cf. Job 18:17; Ps 135:13; Prov 10:7; Isa 26:8) and conveys the idea that the nature or character of the person is to be remembered and praised (S. R. Driver, Exodus, 24).
Exodus 3:15 tn The repetition of “generation” in this expression serves as a periphrasis for the superlative: “to the remotest generation” (GKC 432 §133.l).
Exodus 3:16 tn The form is the perfect tense with the sequential vav (ו) linking the nuance to the imperative that precedes it. Since the imperative calls for immediate action, this form either carries the same emphasis, or instructs action that immediately follows it. This applies likewise to “say,” which follows.
Exodus 3:16 sn “The God of your fathers” is in simple apposition to the name “the Lord” (Heb “Yahweh”) as a recognizable identification. If the holy name were a new one to the Israelites, an explanation would have been needed. Meanwhile, the title “God of my/your/our father(s)” was widely used in the ancient Near East and also in Genesis (26:24; 28:13; 31:5, 29; 46:1, 3; N. M. Sarna, Exodus [JPSTC], 268).
Exodus 3:16 tn The form is the Niphal perfect of the verb “to see.” See the note on “appeared” in 3:2.
Exodus 3:16 tn The verb פָּקַד (paqad) has traditionally been rendered “to visit.” This only partially communicates the point of the word. When God “visited” someone, it meant that he intervened in their lives to change their circumstances or their destiny. When he visited the Amalekites, he destroyed them (1 Sam 15:2). When he visited Sarah, he provided the long awaited child (Gen 21:1). It refers to God’s active involvement in human affairs for blessing or for cursing. Here it would mean that God had begun to act to deliver the Israelites from bondage and give them the blessings of the covenant. The form is joined here with the infinitive absolute to underscore the certainty—“I have indeed visited you.” Some translate it “remember”; others say “watch over.” These do not capture the idea of intervention to bless, and often with the idea of vengeance or judgment on the oppressors. If God were to visit what the Egyptians did, he would stop the oppression and also bring retribution for it. The nuance of the perfect tense could be a perfect of resolve (“I have decided to visit”), or an instantaneous perfect (“I hereby visit”), or a prophetic perfect (“I have visited” = “I will visit”). The infinitive absolute reinforces the statement (so “carefully”), the rendering “attended to” attempts to convey the ideas of personal presence, mental awareness, and action, as when a nurse or physician “attends” a patient.sn The same word was used in the same kind of construction at the end of Genesis (50:24) when Joseph promised, “God will surely visit you” (but there the imperfect tense with the infinitive absolute). Here is another link to the patriarchal narratives. This work of Moses would be interpreted as a fulfillment of Joseph’s prophecy.
Exodus 3:16 tn The second object for the verb is the passive participle הֶעָשׂוּי (heʿasuy). To say that God has visited the oppression (or “attended to” it) affirms that God has decided to judge the oppressing people as he blesses Israel.
Exodus 3:17 tn Heb “And I said.”
Exodus 3:17 tn See the note on this list in 3:8.
Exodus 3:18 tn Heb “And they will listen”; the referent (the elders) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
Exodus 3:18 tn This is the combination of the verb שָׁמַע (shamaʿ) followed by לְקֹלֶךָ (l^eqolekha), an idiomatic formation that means “listen to your voice,” which in turn implies a favorable response.
Exodus 3:18 tn The verb נִקְרָה (niqrah) has the idea of encountering in a sudden or unexpected way (S. R. Driver, Exodus, 25).
Exodus 3:18 tn The form used here is the cohortative of הָלַךְ (halakh). It could be a resolve, but more likely before Pharaoh it is a request. sn Was this a deceptive request if they were not planning on coming back? Since no one knows what the intent was, that question is not likely to be resolved. The request may have been intended to test the waters, so to speak—How did Pharaoh feel about the Israelites? Would he let them go and worship their God as they saw fit? In any case, it gave him the opportunity to grant to the Israelites a permission that other groups are known to have received (N. M. Sarna, Exodus [JPSTC], 19).
Exodus 3:18 tn Here a cohortative with a vav (ו) follows a cohortative; the second one expresses purpose or result: “let us go…in order that we may.”
Exodus 3:19 tn After verbs of perception, as with “I know” here, the object may be a noun clause introduced with the particle כִּי (ki)—“I know that….” Gesenius observes that the object clause may have a kind of accusative and an infinitive construction (especially after נָתַן [natan] with the idea of “allow”): “he will not permit you to go” (see GKC 491 §157.b, n. 2).
Exodus 3:19 tn Heb “and not with a mighty hand.” This expression (וְלֹא בְּיָד חֲזָקָה, v^eloʾ v^eyad khazaqah) is unclear, since v. 20 says that God will stretch out his hand and do his wonders. Some have taken v. 19b to refer to God’s mighty hand also, meaning that the king would not let them go unless a mighty hand compels him (NIV). The expression “mighty hand” is used of God’s rescuing Israel elsewhere (Exod 6:1; 13:9; 32:11; but note also Num 20:20). This idea is a rather general interpretation of the words; it owes much to the LXX, which has “except by a mighty hand,” though “and not with” does not have the meaning of “except” or “unless” in other places. In view of these difficulties, others have suggested that v. 19b means “strong [threats]” from the Israelites (as in 4:24ff. and 5:3; see B. Jacob, Exodus, 81). This does not seem as convincing as the first view. Another possibility is that the phrase conveys Pharaoh’s point of view and intention; the Lord knows that Pharaoh plans to resist letting the Israelites go, regardless of the exercise of a strong hand against him (P. Addinall, “Exodus III 19B and the Interpretation of Biblical Narrative,” VT 49 [1999]: 289-300; see also the construction “and not with” in Num 12:8; 1 Sam 20:15 and elsewhere). If that is the case, v. 20 provides an ironic and pointed contradiction to Pharaoh’s plans as the Lord announces the effect that his hand will have. At any rate, Pharaoh will have to be forced to let Israel go.
Exodus 3:20 sn The outstretched arm is a bold anthropomorphism. It describes the power of God. The Egyptians will later admit that the plagues were by the hand of God (Exod 8:19).
Exodus 3:20 tn The word נִפְלְאֹתַי (nifl^eʾotay) does not specify what the intervention will be. As the text unfolds it will be clear that the plagues are intended. Signs and portents could refer to things people might do, but “wonders” only God could do. The root refers to that which is extraordinary, surpassing, amazing, difficult to comprehend. See Isa 9:6; Gen 18:14; Ps 139:6.
Exodus 3:20 sn The two uses of the root שָׁלָח (shalakh) in this verse contribute to its force. When the Lord “sends” (Qal) his hand, Pharaoh will “send” (Piel) the Israelites out of Egypt.

Luke 20:1-8

The Authority of Jesus

20 Now one^[a] day, as Jesus^[b] was teaching the people in the temple courts^[c] and proclaiming^[d] the gospel, the chief priests and the experts in the law^[e] with the elders came up^[f] ²and said to him,^[g] “Tell us: By what authority^[h] are you doing these things?^[i] Or who is it who gave you this authority?” ³He answered them,^[j] “I will also ask you a question, and you tell me: ⁴John’s baptism^[k]—was it from heaven or from people?”^[l] ⁵So^[m] they discussed it with one another, saying, “If we say, ‘From heaven,’ he will say, ‘Why did you not believe him?’ ⁶But if we say, ‘From people,’ all the people will stone us, because they are convinced that John was a prophet.” ⁷So^[n] they replied that they did not know^[o] where it came from. ⁸Then^[p] Jesus said to them, “Neither will I tell you^[q] by whose authority^[r] I do these things.”

Footnotes

Luke 20:1 tn Grk “Now it happened that one.” The introductory phrase ἐγένετο (egeneto, “it happened that”), common in Luke (69 times) and Acts (54 times), is redundant in contemporary English and has not been translated. Here καί (kai) has been translated as “now” to indicate the transition to a new topic.
Luke 20:1 tn Grk “he”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
Luke 20:1 tn Grk “the temple.”
Luke 20:1 tn Or “preaching.”
Luke 20:1 tn Or “and the scribes.” See the note on the phrase “experts in the law” in 5:21.
Luke 20:1 sn The chief priests and the experts in the law with the elders came up. The description is similar to Luke 19:47. The leaders are really watching Jesus at this point.
Luke 20:2 tn Grk “and said, saying to him.” This is redundant in English and has been simplified in the translation.
Luke 20:2 tn On this phrase, see BDAG 844 s.v. ποῖος 2.a.γ.
Luke 20:2 sn The leadership is looking back to acts like the temple cleansing (19:45-48). How could a Galilean preacher do these things?
Luke 20:3 tn Grk “answering, he said to them.” This is redundant in English and has been simplified in the translation.
Luke 20:4 sn John, like Jesus, was not a part of the official rabbinic order. So the question “John’s baptism—was it from heaven or from men?” draws an analogy between John the Baptist and Jesus. See Luke 3:1-20; 7:24-27. The phrase John’s baptism refers to the baptism practiced by John.
Luke 20:4 tn The plural Greek term ἀνθρώπων (anthrōpōn) is used here (and in v. 6) in a generic sense, referring to both men and women (cf. NAB, NRSV, “of human origin”; TEV, “from human beings”; NLT, “merely human”).sn The question is whether John’s ministry was of divine or human origin.
Luke 20:5 tn Here δέ (de) has been translated as “so” to indicate the implied result of Jesus’ question.
Luke 20:7 tn Here καί (kai) has been translated as “so” to indicate the implied result of the dilemma Jesus’ opponents faced.
Luke 20:7 sn Very few questions could have so completely revealed the wicked intentions of the religious leaders. Jesus’ question revealed the motivation of the religious leaders and exposed them for what they really were—hypocrites. They indicted themselves when they cited only two options and chose neither of them. The point of Luke 20:1-8 is that no matter what Jesus said in response to their question they were not going to believe it and would in the end use it against him.
Luke 20:8 tn Here καί (kai) has been translated as “then” to indicate the implied sequence of events within the narrative.
Luke 20:8 sn Neither will I tell you. Though Jesus gave no answer, the analogy he used to their own question makes his view clear. His authority came from heaven.
Luke 20:8 tn On this phrase, see BDAG 844 s.v. ποῖος 2.a.γ. This is exactly the same phrase as in v. 2.

New English Translation (NET)

Prev Day

Top

Next Day

Use the calendar to view readings from this devotional.

Log in to read this devotional and:

Revised Common Lectionary (Complementary)

Psalm 17[a]

A prayer of David.

Footnotes

Footnotes

The Authority of Jesus

Footnotes

Psalm 17^[a]