a call, calling, invitation Greek Word Study

[3104] κλῆσις klēsis 11× a call, calling, invitation; in NT the call or invitation to the privileges of the Gospel, Rom. 11:29; Eph. 1:18; the favor and privilege of the invitation, 2 Thess. 1:11; 2 Pet. 1:10; the temporal condition in which the call found a person, 1 Cor. 1:26; 7:20 [2821] See calling. [ Goodrick-Kohlenberger number ] Goodrick-Kohlenberger number × the number of times it occurs in the New Testament NT New Testament [ corresponding Strong’s number ] corresponding Strong’s number William D. Mounce, Mounce’s Complete Expository Dictionary of Old & New Testament Words (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2006), 1191.   kaléō [to call], klḗsis [calling], klētós [called], antikaléō [to invite back], enkaléō [to accuse], énklēma [accusation], eiskaléō [to invite], metakaléō [to bring], prokaléō [to provoke], synkaléō [to call together], epikaléō [to call out, appeal], proskaléō [to invite, summon], ekklēsía [assembly, church] kaléō. 1. Data. kaléō, meaning “to call,” appears often throughout the NT, especially in Luke and Acts, less frequently in Mark and John. It may always be rendered “to call,” but often has the special nuance of divine calling or vocation. a. In the active with accusative and vocative we find it in Lk. 6:46: “Why do you   p 395  call me ‘Lord, Lord’?” With accusative of object and predicative accusative it means “to name” in e.g., Mt. 10:25; Lk 1:59; Mt. 1:21, 23; Lk. 1:13. It also occurs in the passive in this sense in various constructions (cf. Mt. 2:23; Mk. 11:17; Lk. 1:32; Jn. 1:42; Acts 1:12, etc.). b. Another fairly common use is for “to call to,” “to invite,” e.g., in Mt. 20:8; 22:4; Mk. 3:31; Lk. 7:39; Jn. 2:2; Acts 4:18 and 24:2 (in a legal sense); 1 Cor. 10:27. c. Often it is God or Christ who calls. God calls his Son (Mt. 2:15). Jesus calls the disciples (Mt. 4:21). He calls sinners to repentance (Mt. 9:13). God calls us to himself or to salvation (Rom. 8:30). He has called the seed of Abraham (Rom. 9:7). He has called both Jews and Gentiles (Rom. 9:24). He has called Christians to fellowship with his Son (1 Cor. 1:9). He has called us to peace (1 Cor. 7:15), in grace (Gal. 1:6), to freedom (Gal. 5:13), to his kingdom and glory (1 Th. 2:12), in holiness (1 Th. 4:7; cf. 2:13–14), to eternal life (1 Tim. 6:12), to light (1 Pet. 2:9), yet at the same time to suffering (1 Pet. 2:20–21). Christ himself is called (Heb. 5:4). As Abraham is called (11:8), he is a type of Christians, who may simply be described as “the called” (9:15), and who are as such invited to the marriage feast of the Lamb (Rev. 19:9). If Jesus does the calling in the Gospels, he does so in fulfilment of a divine function, and the proper response is faith, which carries with it not only discipleship but also the blessings of salvation. Behind the term, then, stands the whole work of God, through Christ, in judgment and grace. This takes place either directly with Jesus’ own calling or in the gospel ministry (cf. 2 Th. 2:14). In this use of the term there is thus a technical element even where this is not explicit. 2. Parallels. a. For “to name” we find parallels in Gen. 17:19; 1 Sam. 1:20, etc. Names are important in the OT world. To be called something is equal to being it (cf. the parallelism in Lk. 1:32). b. The use of the word for “to invite” is common from Homer and occurs in the papyri and LXX. c. We also find parallels for the idea of God calling us with a view to our obedience (cf. in addition to more general parallels Prov. 1:24; Philo On the Special Laws 4.187; 1 Clem. 32.4 etc.; Hermas Similitudes 9.14.5; Mandates 4.3.4). 3. Origin. a. The main origin of the NT usage is to be sought in the LXX. The richest source is to be found in Is. 40ff. (cf. 41:9; 42:6; 46:11; 48:12; 51:2; cf. also naming in 43:1; 45:3). b. The Hebrew term is usually qārāʾ. The objective force of kaleín may also be seen from its use for words meaning “to take” and “to be.” c. The idea of invitation or summons to salvation is a common one in rabbinic writings. An ordinary word thus acquires special significance through the fact a. that God is the subject and b. that salvation is the goal. klḗsis. 1. Data. In Rom. 11:29 God’s klḗsis is his call or calling. In 1 Cor. 1:26 the Corinthians are to consider their call; God “chose” the foolish and weak etc. (v. 27). In 1 Cor. 7:20 they are to remain in the state of their calling. This is not their secular “vocation,” for they were called in the Lord and their klḗsis is with God (vv. 22ff.). In Eph. 1:18 the hope of one’s calling is the hope to which one is called (cf. 4:4). Eph. 4:1 speaks of a life worthy of calling, Phil. 3:14 of a prize of calling, 2 Th. 2:11 of being worthy of God’s call, 2 Tim. 1:9 of a holy calling, Heb. 3:1 of a heavenly   p 396  call, and 2 Pet. 1:10 of the confirming of one’s call and election. In all these passages there is a technical nuance, so that “calling” is usually a better rendering than “call,” though call is always possible. The element of grace in calling comes out especially well in 2 Tim. 1:9. 2. Parallels. a. There are a few instances of klḗsis for “naming” or “name.” b. Invitation is more common (cf. Jdt. 12:10; 3 Macc. 5:14; Jer. 31:6 LXX). c. The religious sense of “calling” occurs in Epictetus Dissertationes 1.29.49 (the imposing of a difficult task); Barn. 16.9 (the calling of the promise); Hermas Mandates 4.3.6 (great and august calling, i.e., baptism). [In a distinctive secular usage we find klḗsis or kalḗseis for the Roman classes.] 3. Origin. Since klḗsis as a verbal noun is equivalent to kaleín, the origin of its use in the NT is the same. Its absence from the LXX may be accidental, or may be due to the influence of Hebrew, which has fewer verbal nouns than verbs. klētós. 1. Data. a. This verbal adjective occurs ten or eleven times in the NT. It is sometimes a verb and sometimes a noun referring to Christians. Examples are Rom. 1:1, 6–7; 8:28; 1 Cor. 1:1, 2, 24; Jude 1; Rev. 17:14; Mt. 22:14, and some versions of Mt. 20:16. b. klētós apóstolos in Rom. 1:1 might suggest a call to office, but for Paul calling as a Christian and as an apostle is the same thing. c. Mt. 22:14, unlike other NT passages, seems to distinguish between the called (klētoí) and the elect (eklektoí) (cf. Rev. 17:14). To get the point we really need to know the Aramaic original. The saying may also be dialectical; its aim is perhaps to show that calling cannot be taken for granted, so that there is no real distinction between calling and electing. Similar paradoxes may be found in Jesus’ attitude to prayer and his description of opponents in Mt. 8:12 as sons of the kingdom. 2. Parallels. While the word goes back to Homer, parallels are few. a. The LXX has it for “named” in Ex. 12:16. b. Homer uses it for “invited,” “welcome,” in the Odyssey 17.286. c. “Divinely called” occurs only in the Christian sphere, e.g., 1 Clement. 3. Origin. The origin is similar to that of klḗsis. Ex. 12:16 probably lies behind the combination of klētós and hágios. There is no evidence that klētós was a cultic term in pagan religion. anti-, enkaléō, énklēma, eis-, meta-, pro-, synkaléō. These compounds are not of theological significance in the NT. enkaléō occurs in a legal sense (“to accuse”) in Acts, as does the noun énklēma. meta- for “to have brought” occurs only in Acts, syn- for “to call together” in Mk. 15:16; Lk. 15, 6, 9, eis- for “to invite” in Acts 10:23, anti- for “to invite back” in Lk. 14:12, and pro- (“to provoke”) in Gal. 5:26. epikaléō. 1. Data. a. A first meaning is “to name” (cf. Mt. 10:25 [active]; Lk. 22:3; Acts 1:23, etc.; Heb. 11:16; Jms. 2:7 [passive]). b. The middle use for “to appeal to someone” is a common legal one (cf. Paul’s appeal to Caesar in Acts 25:11–12). Less technically, cf. the appeal to God in 2 Cor. 1:23. Often, too, there is appeal to God in prayer (cf. Acts 2:21; 7:59; 9:21; 22:16; Rom. 10:12; 2 Tim. 2:22: calling on God).   p 397  2. Parallels. There are many Greek parallels for the sense a. “to name” and also for b. “to appeal,” whether in literature, the papyri, or Josephus. Calling on God is found in the LXX, but also in classical authors and the papyri. 3. Origin. a. While NT usage reflects the general use, LXX influence is strong. Thus in Acts 15:17 naming the Gentiles by God’s name implies that they are his by his self-revelation to them (cf. Jms. 2:7). b. LXX influence is also strong in the idea of calling on God in prayer (cf. Pss. 50:15; 53:4; 86:5; 89:26; 91:15, etc.). c. The usage in the LXX and NT suggests that calling on the name of the Lord is almost a technical term (cf. Gen. 13:4; 21:33; Ps. 79:6, etc.). d. Often the LXX translates the Hebrew original by krázein, perhaps because of some similarity of sound. That we have in the Hebrew as well as the Greek equivalents a technical term for prayer may be seen from the absolute use. e. In the NT “calling on the name of the Lord” (in prayer) may refer to God the Father (Acts 2:21) but also to God the Son (Acts 7:59; Rom. 10:12ff.; 2 Tim. 2:22). Those who “call on the name of our Lord Jesus Christ” (1 Cor. 1:2) are Christians. Directing prayer to Jesus is a mark of faith in him as the Messiah. proskaléō. 1. Data. Only the middle occurs in the NT and the term rarely has theological significance; it is simply used when people call another, or others, to them (cf. Mk. 15:44; Lk. 7:18; 15:26; Acts 5:40; 6:2; 13:7, etc.; Jms. 5:14). God does the calling in Acts 2:39, the Holy Spirit in Acts 13:2, and Jesus in Mt. 10:1; Mk. 3:13, etc. 2. Parallels. Greek writings show that the middle is preferred, and it may be a legal term for “to bring to judgment” (cf. some of the instances in Acts). 3. Origin. LXX influence is plain in Acts 2:39 (Joel 2:32) and 16:10. In Matthew and Mark the style suggests that when Jesus calls to himself he is fulfilling the divine calling as the Christ (cf. the more or less fixed opening to the accounts). ekklēsía. A. Introduction. General dictionaries define ekklēsía as 1. “assembly” and 2. “church.” NT lexicons then distinguish between church as a. the whole body and b. the local congregation or house church. The emphasis differs according to denomination, although sometimes the basic unity is perceived. Since the NT uses a single term, translations should also try to do so, but this raises the question whether “church” or “congregation” is always suitable, especially in view of the OT use for Israel and the underlying Hebrew and Aramaic. It must also be asked why the NT community avoids a cultic term for itself and selects a more secular one. “Assembly,” then, is perhaps the best single term, particularly as it has both a concrete and an abstract sense, i.e., for the assembling as well as the assembly. B. The NT. An important question is why ekklēsía does not occur in such books as Mark, Luke, John, and 1 and 2 Peter. (Its absence from Jude is less significant, as also that from 2 Timothy and Titus in view of 1 Timothy, and 1 and 2 John in view of 3 John.) 1. Acts. The first passages in Acts (2:47; 5:11; 7:38; 8:1, 3; 9:31) are important in view of the use not only for the Jerusalem church (8:1) but for the church throughout Judea and also for OT Israel (7:38). The singular predominates, but later we also find   p 398  the plural (possibly 9:31, probably 15:41, certainly 16:5). A pregnant saying is 20:28: “the ekklēsía of the Lord which he bought with his own blood.” In all these verses the local church is called ekklēsía with no question of precedence or of local emphasis. The singular and plural are interchangeable. Two or more churches do not make the church, nor are there many churches, but one church in many places, whether Jewish, Gentile, or mixed. The only descriptive term that is added is toú theoú (or kýriou), which clearly marks it off from a secular society (denoted in 2:47 by laós). In three instances there is a purely secular use (19:32, 39, 40), which shows that what matters is not assembling as such but who assembles and why. In the case of the church it is God (or the Lord) who assembles his people, so that the church is the ekklēsía of God consisting of all those who belong to him (cf. hólē in 5:11; 15:22). Applied to believers, the term is essentially a qualitative one, the assembly of those whom God himself gathers. 2. Pauline Episties, I. The usage in Paul is similar; cf. the free use of singular and plural (Rom. 16:23; 16:4, 16; Gal. 1:13, 22), the use of hólē (Rom. 16:23), and the references to a place (Rom. 16:1) or district (1 Cor. 16:19). Occasional omission of the article shows that ekklēsía is almost a proper name (cf. 1 Cor. 14:19; 2 Cor. 8:23). Even a small house church may be called ekklēsía (Rom. 16:5). Each local church represents the whole church (2 Cor. 1:1: “the church which is at Corinth”), so that what applies in it (1 Cor. 6:4; 11:18; 14:34) will apply everywhere. For Paul, too, toú theoú is the main definition, whether in the singular (1 Cor. 1:2) or the plural (1:16). (This shows that he does not differentiate church and churches, as is sometimes done.) Since God acts in Christ, en Christṓ (Gal. 1:22) or toú Christoú (Rom. 16:16) may also occur; “Christian” is too colorless a rendering for this. We also find “churches of the saints” in 1 Cor. 14:33—natural in view of the equation of the ekklēsía with the “sanctified in Christ Jesus” in 1:2. Materially, Paul shares his conception of the church with the early disciples. The church is still the ekklēsía toú theoú as in the OT, but with the new thing that God has fulfilled the covenant in Christ, and that Christ has manifested himself to his disciples and commissioned them to assemble a people in his name. The church is constituted and authorized by the appearances of the risen Lord, not by the charismatic experiences that are also enjoyed by the disciples and Paul. Paul thus recognizes the privileges of the first community and its leaders, as may be seen in his organizing of the collection for Jerusalem (which is not just a matter of benevolence or strategy) and his description of James etc. as “pillars” in Gal. 2:9 (even if there is irony here in view of their human fallibility and the mistaken desire of some to overexalt authoritative persons). Paul has no desire to impose a new view of the church, but rather to protect the original view against incipient innovations. For him the church stands or falls with its sole foundation in Christ, its acknowledgment of him alone as Lord, and the rejection of overemphasis on persons or places. No description of the church is given, but Paul gets to the heart of the matter with his understanding of it (parallel to that of Acts) as an assembly which is the assembly of God in Christ. 3. Pauline Epistles, II: Colossians and Ephesians. A more specific doctrine of the church unfolds in these epistles. It is Christ’s body, with Christ himself as head (Col. 1:18, 24; Eph. 1:22; 5:23). There is a relation of coordination and subordination between it and Christ (Eph. 5:24–25, 29). The church is to be holy and without blemish (5:27). Through it God’s wisdom is to be made known (3:10). The human statements here circle around a divine mystery (3:4–5). All that concerns Christ and the church is God’s doing. The mystery of their union forms a model for that of husband and   p 399  wife even as it is also illustrated by this (5:25ff.). The images are taken from the contemporary world: the Redeemer overcomes hostile powers on his heavenly ascent (Eph. 4:8ff.), breaks down the wall of division (2:14ff.), creates the new man (2:15), loves and cherishes the church as his spouse (5:22ff.), and builds it up as his body (2:19ff.). Yet while these ideas are related to the world of Gnostic speculation, and can hardly be either derived from such passages as Rom. 12:4ff. or fused into a consistent picture, their import is practical rather than theoretical or esoteric. For a. they express the strict relation between Christ and the church, and thus serve a christological ecclesiology, and b. they protect an exalted Christology in the difficult situation caused by false teaching and the tensions between Jewish and Gentile Christians. These concerns are wholly Pauline even if a new set of concepts has to be used to meet the Jewish devaluation of the church by focusing on place and person and the Gnostic exaggeration which postulates a marriage between Christ and wisdom rather than between Christ and his people. Indeed, even the ideas of these letters are present materially, if not formally, in epistles like Romans and 1 and 2 Corinthians, where the church is the body in its interrelationships (1 Cor. 12) and Paul’s aim is to present it as a pure bride to her husband (2 Cor. 11:2). The language may be Gnostic, but the point is to show that the church is not just a human society but is defined in terms of Christ. Ecclesiology is Christology and vice versa. All human distinctions are thus transcended (Col. 3:11; cf. Gal. 3:28). Yet this is no Christ mysticism, for the church can be Christ’s body only by obeying God’s call in Christ, and the God who calls in Christ is the God of the old covenant who has now established the new, so that the NT assembly is the fulfilled OT assembly. If holiness is ascribed to this community, it is not as a quality but in virtue of God’s justifying and sanctifying work in Christ, on the basis of which the word of promise to Israel is now the word of fulfilled promise to Christians. 4. The Rest of the NT. The other NT passages add little to what has been said. Revelation uses the plural 13 times and also speaks of the church of Ephesus, Smyrna, etc. 3 John has the term twice with and once without the article. Jms. 5:14 mentions the elders of the church, probably referring to the whole community. Heb. 2:12 quotes Ps. 22:22, and Heb. 12:23 refers to the assembly of the firstborn, probably not in a technical sense, but simply in that of a festal gathering in heaven (cf. v. 22). C. The Greek World. The Greek world uses ekklēsía for a popular assembly (cf. Acts 19:32, 39–40). The OT and NT give it its specific sense by adding toú theoú or en Christṓ. Did they choose this word because it had a cultic sense? It denotes the assembly of ekklētoí in Greek cities, but there is no sure evidence of use for a cultic society. The secular ekklēsía offers a formal parallel, and may have a religious undertone, as in the offering of prayers, but NT usage derives from that of the LXX. This explains why Latin adopts ecclesia rather than such renderings as curia, civitas Dei, or convocatio. The term ekklēsía has a sacred history in the sacred writings. It stresses the distinctiveness of Christianity as compared to cultic societies, for which there are special terms like thíasos. Hellenistic Jews are probably the first to apply the term to the church, preferring it to synagōgḗ because the latter was acquiring a more restricted sense, and perhaps because there is some similarity of sound between ekklēsía and Heb. qāhāl. D. Parallel Expressions. Often ekklēsía may not be present, but the matter itself is presented under different terms. 1 Peter especially offers such expressions as “spiritual house” (2:5), “chosen race” etc. (2:9), and “God’s people” (2:10). Gal. 6:16   p 400  speaks of the “Israel of God,” Gal. 3:29 of “Abraham’s offspring,” and Jms. 1:1 and 1 Pet. 1:1 of the “twelve tribes” or “exiles” in the dispersion. Less closely related terms are the saints, the brethren, disciples, etc. In Jms. 2:2 the church can also call itself synagōgḗ, which also derives from the OT. The question arises which term might have been used by Aramaic-speaking Christians, and before that by Jesus himself. E. Matt. 16:18 and 18:17. 1. The Problem. There are several difficulties relating to these two passages: their coordination with other ekklēsía passages, their authenticity, their Semitic equivalents, and their correct exposition. Complexity arises because the answers to these questions all affect one another. 2. The Relation of the Two Passages. A specific problem is that 16:18 seems to refer to the whole church and 18:17 to the local church, for which we might have expected synagōgḗ. Is qāhāl the underlying term in both instances? 3. Textual and Literary Criticism. Neither verse offers real textual problems. Literary criticism points out that there are no parallels to 16:18 in Mark or Luke, but it can supply no cogent arguments for the theory of interpolation (and in any case even an interpolation might rest on a genuine tradition). 4. Material Criticism. Mt. 16:17ff. has a Semitic flavor, but the two questions of Jesus and the church and the position of Peter involve statistical, eschatological, historical, and psychological problems. a. The statistical problem is the absence of ekklēsía elsewhere in the Gospels, but as in 1 Peter this fact is not decisive in view of the parallel “flock” in Mt. 26:31 and Jn. 10:16, the gathering of the Twelve as the nucleus of the true people of God, and Jesus’ description of himself as the Son of Man, i.e., the representative of the people of the saints (Dan. 7). Furthermore, the messiahship of Jesus and his institution of the covenant (the Lord’s Supper) show that he must be regarded as the founder of what is later most frequently called the ekklēsía. b. The eschatological problem is whether founding an ekklēsía fits in with the preaching of the kingdom. While the ekklēsía is obviously not the basileía, it is itself plainly an eschatological entity, and regards itself as such. c. The historical argument is that Peter does not occupy the position that he is given in 16:18 (cf. 1 Cor. 3:11; 10:4). On the other hand, he plays a part which is hard to explain on purely historical or psychological grounds, and if he may be challenged, as in Gal. 2 or Jn. 20:2ff., it is hard to see how 16:18 can have arisen and established itself if not authentic. d. The psychological objection is that Peter does not prove to be a rock. But this is only a special aspect of the miracle of grace that is seen in the election of Israel, or indeed of the church itself. 5. Hebrew and Aramaic Equivalents. A separate question is whether the Hebrew original of ekklēsía is qāhāl or the corresponding Aramaic loanword, which is in any case rare. Jesus and the disciples must have known Hebrew, but the rabbis do not necessarily use qāhāl for the Jewish congregation, whether national or local, and the normal Aramaic term (keništāʾ) suggests a specific group which might be regarded as a sect. The point, perhaps, is that Jesus might have used this term, but with the clear implication that this separated group represents the true Israel as the people of God. If this is so, in 18:17 the original reference might well be to the OT community, but rightly the church then applies it to itself with the rendering ekklēsía. F. The OT and Judaism. 1. Greek Judaism. a. The LXX uses ekklēsía about 100 times, mostly for qāhāl. The term ekklēsía has the basic sense of “assembly” (cf. Dt. 9:10; 1 Kgs. 8:65); only   p 401  the addition kyríou gives it a theological sense (cf. Dt. 23:2ff. etc.), or an expression like “of Israel” (1 Kgs. 8:14) or “of the saints” (Ps. 89:5 etc.). The use of synagōgḗ is similar. It, too, is often used for qāhāl, and it has both a general sense (“assembly”) and a technical sense (“congregation of Israel”). b. In Philo and Josephus the position is much the same, but there is more reference to national assemblies, and the technical sense is also more pronounced. 2. The Hebrew Text. While ekklēsía is almost always used for qāhāl, qāhāl is rendered ekklēsía only in some books (e.g., Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Samuel, Kings, Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, Psalms). Elsewhere synagōgḗ is the equivalent, or occasionally other terms like óchlos or sýstasis. synagōgē, unlike ekklēsía, is also used ʿ ēḏâ, which is common in Exodus, Leviticus, and Numbers. G. Etymology. Since the NT ekklēsía is given its specific impress by the OT, the history is more important than the etymology, especially as neither ekkaleín nor ékklētos occurs in the NT, and both are also very rare in the LXX. The NT writers are unlikely to have had the idea of “called out” in mind when they spoke about the ekklēsía (though cf. Eph. 5:25ff.; 1 Tim. 3:15; Heb. 12:23). If the church does in fact consist of those whom God has called out of the world, this relates to material rather than linguistic considerations. What is always meant is the “assembly (of God).” The word “church” suggests the universal aspect, and etymologically its belonging to the Lord (kyriakón), but it has the disadvantage of having acquired a hierarchical nuance. The word “congregation” makes the point that the small fellowship is already the church, and it stresses the aspect of gathering together, but it has the disadvantage of drawing attention to the individual group, sometimes in a sectarian sense. “Church community” might be commended as a possible alternative to both. H. The Apostolic Fathers and Early Catholicism. In the early church we find signs of a shift in the use of adjectives and the rise of speculation. In the first works ekklēsía is common only in Hermas with its vision of the kyría, who is hagía and presbytéra, the morphḗ of a holy spirit (cf. Visions 1.1ff.). 1 Clement in three instances has a use similar to that of 1 Pet. 1:1 and Jms. 1:1. Ignatius has imposing epithets in his epistles, many of them quite extravagant. In Ephesians 5.5 God, Christ, and the church are presented as one entity to believers. The churches have single bishops, and the word katholikḗ appears in Smyrneans 8.2. In the Martyrdom of Polycarp the church is holy and catholic, sojourning in the different places. In the Didache the church is scattered but is to be gathered into the kingdom (9.4). An obscure phrase here speaks of the worldly mystery of the church enacted by the true prophet (11.11). 2 Clement stresses the dimension of mystery in 14.1. With its reference to the preexistence of the church, this links up with speculation about the aeon of the church and statements about the ideal church in contrast to the empirical church (cf. Augustine, and the later distinction between the invisible church and the visible). J. Conclusion. The development of “Catholicism” as distinct from primitive Christianity is plainly apparent in the area of the church with the rise of Gnostic speculation and the influence of Platonism. The NT itself makes no distinction between an invisible triumphant church and a visible militant church. The church, as the individual congregation representing the whole, is always visible, and its righteousness and holiness are always imputed through faith. Luther recognizes this when he prefers the term “congregation” to “church” in his rendering of Scripture. Yet if the ideal is not to be played off against the reality, no more is the whole church against the local congregation.   p 402  Every congregation represents the whole church, that at Corinth no less than that at Jerusalem. The development of larger organizations does not alter this basic truth. If there is an element of constitutional change, e.g., with the greater stress on bishops and deacons than on charismatics, this does not in the NT represent an essential change from a pneumatic to a juristic form. Such a change comes only later when lofty speculation about the church attributes divine significance to historical developments and thus makes possible the step from primitive Christianity to early and later “Catholicism.”      [K. L. SCHMIDT, III, 487–536] → anénklētos, parakaléō, paráklētos, symparakaléō kalodidáskalos → didáskō LXX Septuagint LXX Septuagint LXX Septuagint LXX Septuagint LXX Septuagint LXX Septuagint LXX Septuagint LXX Septuagint LXX Septuagint LXX Septuagint LXX Septuagint LXX Septuagint LXX Septuagint LXX Septuagint Gerhard Kittel, Gerhard Friedrich, and Geoffrey William Bromiley, Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, Abridged in One Volume (Grand Rapids, MI: W.B. Eerdmans, 1985), 394–402. CALL, CALLED, CALLING A. Verbs. 1. kaleo (καλέω, 2564), derived from the root kal—, whence Eng. “call” and “clamor” (see B and C, below), is used (a) with a personal object, “to call anyone, invite, summon,” e.g., Matt. 20:8; 25:14; it is used particularly of the divine call to partake of the blessings of redemption, e.g., Rom. 8:30; 1 Cor. 1:9; 1 Thess. 2:12; Heb. 9:15; cf. B and C, below; (b) of nomenclature or vocation, “to call by a name, to name”; in the passive voice, “to be called by a name, to bear a name.” Thus it suggests either vocation or destination; the context determines which, e.g., Rom. 9:25–26; “surname,” in Acts 15:37, KJV, is incorrect (RV, “was called”). See BID, NAME. 2. eiskaleo (εἰσκαλέω, 1528), lit., “to call in,” hence, “to invite” (eis, “in,” and No. 1), is found in Acts 10:23.¶ 3. epikaleo (ἐπικαλέομαι, 1941), epi, “upon,” and No. 1., denotes (a) “to surname”; (b) “to be called by a person’s name”; hence it is used of being declared to be dedicated to a person, as to the Lord, Acts 15:17 (from Amos 9:12); Jas. 2:7; (c) “to call a person by a name by charging him with an offense,” as the Pharisees charged Christ with doing His works by the help of Beelzebub, Matt. 10:25 (the most authentic reading has epikaleo, for kaleo); (d) “to call upon, invoke”; in the middle voice, “to call upon for oneself” (i.e., on one’s behalf), Acts 7:59, or “to call upon a person as a witness,” 2 Cor. 1:23, or to appeal to an authority, Acts 25:11, etc.; (e)“to call upon by way of adoration, making use of the Name of the Lord,” Acts 2:21; Rom. 10:12–14; 2 Tim. 2:22. See APPEAL, SURNAME.  4. metakaleo (μετακαλέω, 3333), meta, implying “change,” and No. 1, “to call from one place to another, to summon” (cf. the Sept. of Hos. 11:1), is used in the middle voice only, “to call for oneself, to send for, call hither,” Acts 7:14; 10:32; 20:17; 24:25.¶  5. proskaleo (προσκαλέομαι, 4341), pros, “to,” and No. 1, signifies (a) “to call to oneself, to bid to come”; it is used only in the middle voice, e.g., Matt. 10:1; Acts 5:40; Jas. 5:14; (b) “God’s call to Gentiles through the gospel,” Acts 2:39; (c) the divine call in entrusting men with the preaching of the gospel,” Acts 13:2; 16:10.¶  6. sunkaleo (συγκαλέω, 4779) signifies “to call together,” Mark 15:16; Luke 9:1; 15:6, 9; 23:13; Acts 5:21; 10:24; 28:17.¶ Notes: (1) Enkaleo, Acts 19:40, KJV, “called in question,” signifies “to accuse,” as always in the RV. See ACCUSE, IMPLEAD. (2) Parakaleo, “to beseech, intreat,” is rendered “have called for” in Acts 28:20, KJV; RV, “did intreat” (marg., “call for”). It is used only here with this meaning. See BESEECH. 7. ait eo (αἰτέω, 154), “to ask,” is translated “called for” in Acts 16:29 (“he called for lights”). See ASK, A. No. 1. Note: For the RV of Matt. 19:17 (KJV, “callest”), see ASK (A, No. 2, Note).  8. phoneo (φωνέω, 5455), “to sound” (Eng.,“phone”), is used of the crowing of a cock, e.g., Matt. 26:34; John 13:38; of “calling” out with a clear or loud voice, to cry out, e.g. Mark 1:26 (some mss. have krazo here), Acts 16:28; of “calling” to come to oneself, e.g., Matt. 20:32; Luke 19:15; of “calling” forth, as of Christ’s call to Lazarus to come forth from the tomb, John 12:17; of inviting, e.g., Luke 14:12; of “calling” by name, with the implication of the pleasure taken in the possession of those “called,” e.g., John 10:3; 13:13. See CROW, CRY. 9. lego (λέγω, 3004), “to speak,” is used of all kinds of oral communication, e.g. “to call to call by name,” to surname, Matt. 1:16; 26:36;  V 2, p 87   John 4:5; 11:54; 15:15; Rev. 2:2, RV, “call themselves,” etc. See ASK.  10. epilego (ἐπιλέγομαι, 1951), epi “upon,” and No. 9, signifies “to call in addition,” i.e., by another name besides that already intimated John 5:2; for its other meaning in Acts 15:40, see CHOOSE.¶  11. chrēmatizō (χρηματίζω, 5337) occasionally means “to be called or named,” Acts 11:26 (of the name “Christians”) and Rom. 7:3, the only places where it has this meaning. Its primary significance, “to have business dealings with,” led to this. They “were (publicly) called” Christians, because this was their chief business. See ADMONISH, REVEAL, SPEAK, WARN. 12. eipon (λέγω, 3004), “to say, speak,” means “to call by a certain appellation,” John 10:35. See BID, No. 3.  13. krino (κρίνω, 2919), “to judge,” is translated “to call in question,” in Acts 23:6; 24:21. Notes: (1) For onoma, “a name,” translated “called,” KJV, in Luke 24:13; Acts 10:1, onomazo, “to name,” translated “called,” KJV, 1 Cor. 5:11, and eponomazo, “to surname,” translated “art called,” Rom. 2:17, see NAME and SURNAME. (2) Lego, “to say,” is rendered “calleth” in 1 Cor. 12:3, KJV, which the RV corrects to “saith”, what is meant is not calling Christ “Anathema,” but making use of the phrase “Anathema Jesus,” i.e., “Jesus is accursed.” (3) Prosagoreuo, Heb. 5:10, means “to be named.” See NAME.¶ (4) Metapempo, rendered “call for,” in Acts 10:5, KJV, and 11:13, signifies “to fetch,” RV. See FETCH, SEND, No. 9. (5) Sunathroizo, “to assemble,” is translated “he called together,” in the KJV of Acts 19:25; RV, “he gathered together.” (6) Lambano, “to take or receive,” is found with the noun hupomnesis, “remembrance,” in 2 Tim. 1:5; RV, “having been reminded” (lit., “having received remembrance”), for KJV, “when I call to remembrance.” (7) In Acts 10:15 and 11:9, koinoo, “to make common” (RV) is translated “call common” in the KJV. (8) For prosphoneo, “to call unto,” see SPEAK, No. 12. B. Noun. klesis (κλη̂σις, 2821), “a calling” (akin to A, No. 1), is always used in the NT of that “calling” the origin, nature and destiny of which are heavenly (the idea of invitation being implied); it is used especially of God’s invitation to man to accept the benefits of salvation, Rom. 11:29; 1 Cor. 1:26; 7:20 (said there of the condition in which the “calling” finds one); Eph. 1:18, “His calling”; Phil. 3:14, the “high calling”; 2 Thess. 1:11 and 2 Pet. 1:10, “your calling”; 2 Tim. 1:9, a “holy calling”; Heb. 3:1, a “heavenly calling”; Eph. 4:1, “the calling wherewith ye were called”; 4:4, “in one hope of your calling.” See VOCATION.¶ C. Adjective.  kletos (κλητός, 2822), “called, invited,” is used, (a) “of the call of the gospel,” Matt. 20:16; 22:14, not there “an effectual call,” as in the Epistles, Rom. 1:1, 6–7; 8:28; 1 Cor. 1:2, 24; Jude 1; Rev. 17:14; in Rom. 1:7 and 1 Cor. 1:2 the meaning is “saints by calling”; (b) of “an appointment to apostleship,” Rom. 1:1; 1 Cor. 1:1.¶ ¶ Indicates that all the NT occurrences of the Greek word under consideration are mentioned under the heading or sub-heading. ¶ Indicates that all the NT occurrences of the Greek word under consideration are mentioned under the heading or sub-heading. ¶ Indicates that all the NT occurrences of the Greek word under consideration are mentioned under the heading or sub-heading. ¶ Indicates that all the NT occurrences of the Greek word under consideration are mentioned under the heading or sub-heading. ¶ Indicates that all the NT occurrences of the Greek word under consideration are mentioned under the heading or sub-heading. ¶ Indicates that all the NT occurrences of the Greek word under consideration are mentioned under the heading or sub-heading. ¶ Indicates that all the NT occurrences of the Greek word under consideration are mentioned under the heading or sub-heading. ¶ Indicates that all the NT occurrences of the Greek word under consideration are mentioned under the heading or sub-heading. W. E. Vine, Merrill F. Unger, and William White Jr., Vine’s Complete Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words (Nashville, TN: T. Nelson, 1996), 85–87. Furnished by Rick Livermore Webmaster220 San Juan Capistrano California –  https://rick-livermore-on-blogger.blogspot.com/