The scriptures state that we were all away from God, and were his enemies before receiving jesus thru faith, correct?
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
The Nature of "called" in 1 Cor. 1:26-31
- Thread starter The Biblicist
- Start date
- Status
No. I believe that is the stated objective behind election before the foundation of the world.
I don't think that is true. God promised that he would make of him a great nation in Genesis 12:1-3 and what Abraham wondered is how God would accomplish that promise since he had no children.
Gen. 12:1 ¶ Now the LORD had said to Abram, Get you out of your country, and from your kindred, and from your father’s house, to a land that I will show you:
2 And I will make of you a great nation, and I will bless you, and make your name great; and you shall be a blessing:
3 And I will bless them that bless you, and curse him that curses you: and in you shall all families of the earth be blessed.
In Genesis 15 Abraham is not concerned about "reward" or "inheritance" but about the promise that God would make a great nation out of his own loins but he had no children and the inheritance he did possess would be passed on to his servant:
1 ¶ After these things the word of the LORD came to Abram in a vision, saying, Fear not, Abram: I am your shield, and your exceeding great reward.
2 ¶ And Abram said, LORD God, what will you give me, seeing I go childless, and the steward of my house is this Eliezer of Damascus?
3 And Abram said, Behold, to me you have given no seed: and, see, one born in my house is my heir.
In other words, Abram was concerned about having no offspring due to the age of both Sarai and himself and yet God had promised to "to make of you a great nation." Inheritance was a secondary matter not the primary matter.
There is no argument about what we are ultimately "called" unto but the OP is about what we are initially called unto and the nature of that initial calling by God. Abraham was "called" directly by God through the gospel (Gal.3:8) out of heathenism or a redemptive calling that was effectual unto his salvation.
By faith Abraham, when he was called to go out into a place which he should after receive for an inheritance, obeyed; and he went out, not knowing where he went. - Heb. 11:8
Note that he was first "called to go out" by the gospel (Gal. 3:8) before he came "into a place which he should AFTER receive for an inheritance....and HE WENT OUT..." So initial calling was redemptive whereas the final objective was "for an inheritance." In 1 Corinthians 1:26-31 Paul is dealing with the initial redemptive calling and it is obvious the context is not dealing with ultimate inheritance in the new heaven and earth. Election is to "salvation" with regard to "belief of the truth" (2 Thes. 2:13-14) of the gospel.
No, you are attempting to read into the text of the OP what is simply not there. He is not speaking about eventual inheritance in some future new heaven and earth. He is referring to INITIAL REDEMPTIVE CALLING through the gospel just as Abraham had been INITIALLY AND REDEMPTIVELY CALLED through the gospel (Gal. 3:8; Heb. 11:8).
Last edited:
You have identified your own problem. Israel is simply a TYPE whereas the ANTITYPE is that election is first an INWARD CALLING "according to the faith of Abraham" who was FIRST chosen by God to be redemptively and inwardly effectually called through the gospel out of heathenism (that is what our OP text is about) before he was called to "after" receive an inheritance once arriving at the place promised. 1 Corinthians 1:17-31 is about being "chosen by God" unto that INITIAL effectual gospel calling as the context begins with declaring the gospel superior to baptism because the power to save is found in the gospel and not in baptism. The Gentiles seek wisdom and the Jews seek a sign, but to us who believe it is the elective effectual gospel that is the wisdom and power of God that distinguishes us from others. God has not called "many" wise because God has not chosen or elected "many" wise but all that He has chosen he has called effectually and so that is why Paul could say "OF GOD are ye in Christ....that no man should glory" before him.
There is no redemptive language used here. It is best not to build doctrine upon what at best could only be viewed as a type and I am not even sure it could be used as a type of redemptive calling.
'calling' in 1Cor 1:26 is an erroneous interpretation, and should be translated "you percieve your call, brothers". That call has nothing to do with election or predestination, but rather "you were called [invited and welcomed] into fellowship with His Son" 1Cor 1:9; not here a selection being made but a result of the One into whom we were placed; to have fellowship with Christ and with His many brothers.
I don't see that it makes any difference whether one speaks of a 'call' or a 'calling.' The question is whether it is an effectual call, and verses 27 & 28 suggest that it is effectual because it speaks of God having 'chosen.'
The translation 'calling' in v26 implies an action through the use of a participle, where a participle is not used in the Gk. text, and where no action is implied.
In 1Cor 1:27-29, God selects out / chooses out [a verb from ek meaning out from, and légō meaning to say or to speak] inanimate things - foolish and weak things [both neuter adjectives], not refering to individuals but to character or a systematic. The emphasis here is upon an action of separation out from something, because of the prefix ek, meaning out from.
"call" in 1Cor 1:24 and v26 is klētós [a noun from the verb kaléō meaning to call someone that he may come or go] and should not be comflated with the verb légō in v27-29. The emphasis here is not an action but the substantive, the invitation type call describing an event, without the idea of action coming out of something and going into something else - merely the summons itself to come or to go. The summons was by God to Christ (1Cor 1:9) in order to "save those who believe" (1Cor 1:21).
In 1Cor 1, none of the nouns meaning a call / an invitation, and none of the verbs to call out / to select out / to choose out, even remotely suggest or imply a predetermined or foreordained election of individuals to salvation.
The noun "call" suggests, indeed demands, the action of calling. If no one has called, there is no call QED.
The neuter plurals must refer to persons since the people of verse 26 ('not many wise....not many mighty, not many noble') are those who are foolish, weak, base and insignificant, contrasted with the 'wise' (masculine plural) of v.27.
[As a point of minor interest, the Countess of Huntingdon used to say that she had been saved by the letter M, since if Paul had written " not any noble,' she could not have been saved]
This is wrong. kletos (v.24) is an adjective-- 'called,' 'invited;' klesis (v.26) is a noun, 'calling,' 'call,' invitation' (Thayer).
As you write above, the verb is not lego but eklego, in the Middle Voice, meaning to 'choose out for oneself,' often as the recipients of special favour as in Mark 13:20; Acts 13:17. It is also used to the Lord's choosing of His apostles.
Simply wrong, as shown above. That God saves those who believe is not at issue; the question is how they come to believe, and the reason given in 1 Cor. 1 is that they are called by God. 'But of Him [God] you are in Christ Jesus.....' (vs.18, 30). None of us, all of Him. Praise His name forever![/QUOTE]
Last edited:
[/QUOTE]
Sinners can do nothing apart from the calling of God towards them to get saved!
[/QUOTE]
Martin,
Thank you for the correction. Yes it was an adjective in 1Cor 1:24, and not a noun.
What is an effectual call, as opposed to a non-effectual call?
Last edited:
This whole thread is an attempt to deny the obvious truth presented in 1 Corinthians 1:26-30.
(1) They were chosen while in the world, because the world considered some to be poor rather than rich, weak rather than powerful, and of common birth rather than noble birth.
(2) The "calling" refers to when they were set apart in Christ, such as being called out of darkness into His marvelous light.
(3) Those chosen were poor to the world, rich in faith and heirs to the kingdom promised to those who love God, thus a conditional election. James 2:5
NASB
26 For consider your calling,[selection] brethren, that there were not many wise according to the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble; 27 but God has chosen the foolish things of the world to shame the wise, and God has chosen the weak things of the world to shame the things which are strong, 28 and the base things of the world and the despised God has chosen, the things that are not, so that He may nullify the things that are, 29 so that no man may boast before God. 30 But by His doing you are in Christ Jesus, who became to us wisdom from God, and righteousness and sanctification, and redemption,
Nowhere does the text say that, no where! The preceding context is about salvation not service and Paul has elsewhere pinpoint the time of God choosing to salvation to have occurred before the foundation of the world (Eph. 1:4; 2 Thes. 2:13). Your next point is admission that salvation is in view not calling to service.
Confession is good for your soul, this is about being chosen to salvation and the effectual call "called out of darkness into his marvelous light" - Amen.
It says the very opposite of what you are saying. Indeed, your conclusion repudiates the very point he is making and that is God's calling and choosing is not based upon anykind of position, status or social distinctions OR ANY OTHER FAVORABLE CONDITIONS SO THAT GOD GETS ALL THE GLORY FOR EVERYTHING. "but of God" they are in Christ not based on conditions they met.
NASB
26 For consider your calling,[selection] brethren, that there were not many wise according to the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble; 27 but God has chosen the foolish things of the world to shame the wise, and God has chosen the weak things of the world to shame the things which are strong, 28 and the base things of the world and the despised God has chosen, the things that are not, so that He may nullify the things that are, 29 so that no man may boast before God. 30 But by His doing you are in Christ Jesus, who became to us wisdom from God, and righteousness and sanctification, and redemption,[/QUOTE]
There is a general call of the Gospel which goes out to all who hear it (e.g. Mark 1:15). But not all respond to it, and of those who do, not all persevere. Though thousands followed Christ at one stage, at the close of His earthly ministry there were only around 120 disciples (Acts 1:15). The parable of the Sower explains why. The fault is not in the sower (preacher), nor in the seed (message preached) but in the soil (heart of the hearer).
But there is also an effectual call. Read Luke 5:27-28. I once preached a sermon on this text, entitled 'Finding, forsaking and following.' We know who does the forsaking and following, but who finds whom?
Or consider Acts 16:14. We read that 'The Lord opened [Lydia's] heart to heed the things spoken by Paul.' Lydia didn't open her heart; Paul didn't open her heart by his preaching. God the Holy Spirit opened her heart so that she would give heed to Paul's preaching. That is an effectual call.
To review, according to Biblicist, the passage does not say those chosen were in the world!
The "effectual call" is an invention of men, found no where in scripture. Note the verses offered in support do not mention the effectual call. It is yet another doctrine based on what scripture does not say.
Next we see the claim James 2:5 does not say those chosen were (1) poor to the world, (2) rich in faith and (3) loved God. It says the very opposite of Biblicist's position.
The "effectual call" is an invention of men, found no where in scripture. Note the verses offered in support do not mention the effectual call. It is yet another doctrine based on what scripture does not say.
Next we see the claim James 2:5 does not say those chosen were (1) poor to the world, (2) rich in faith and (3) loved God. It says the very opposite of Biblicist's position.
But she was reverencing/revering God, and also listening/hearing ... and then her heart was opened thoroughly (Acts 16:14). Taking the full verse into account, it appears as if she did open her heart, and then the Lord opened it thoroughly [προσέχω].
Having her heart opened thoroughly did not guarantee her believing, but enabled her to believe.
The examples you gave do not make clear what you mean by effectual.
Last edited:
Acts 16:14. 'Now a certain woman named Lydia heard us. She.....worshiped God. The Lord opened her heart to heed the things spoken by Paul.'
Lydia was a 'God-fearer' or God-worshipper,' meaning that she was a Gentile who had given up on Graeco-Roman paganism and sat in the Jewish synagogue and heard the teaching (c.f. Acts 10:2, 22; 13:16; 17:4). Clearly there was no synagogue in Philippi, so a few people went down to the river to pray. But Lydia did not know Christ; she was not saved. She was in the same situation as the unbelieving Jews until God opened her heart to believe.
It seems clear enough to me.
Acts 16:14. 'Now a certain woman named Lydia heard us. She.....worshiped God. The Lord opened her heart to heed the things spoken by Paul.'
Lydia was a 'God-fearer' or God-worshipper,' meaning that she was a Gentile who had given up on Graeco-Roman paganism and sat in the Jewish synagogue and heard the teaching (c.f. Acts 10:2, 22; 13:16; 17:4). Clearly there was no synagogue in Philippi, so a few people went down to the river to pray. But Lydia did not know Christ; she was not saved. She was in the same situation as the unbelieving Jews until God opened her heart to believe.
It seems clear enough to me.
But she decided to believe, where the others may not have. The Lord gave Lydia a deeper understanding of Paul's message because she reverenced Him and listened. She decided to reverence, to listen, and to believe. The Lord did not cause her reverence, nor did He make her listen attentively, nor did He effectually believe for Her.
Still nothing of an 'effectual' call in 1Cor 1; as opposed to the same call/invitation which the Lord gives for all to believe in Him.
And may I ask again, what does 'effectual' mean in regards to God's call to believe?
- Status