Teaching on Calling on the Name of the Lord

[Freedom]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

I haven't yet come across any denomination outside of the recovery that practices calling on the name of the Lord. Some movements in neo-pentecostalism come close to "calling on the Lord". I think it is true in my experience that this is something that was recovered.

Originally Posted by RcV

Acts 2:21 Note 1
Calling on the name of the Lord is not a new practice that began with the New Testament. Rather, it began with Enosh, the third generation of mankind, in Gen. 4:26. It was continued by Job, Abraham, Isaac, Moses and the children of Israel…

In the New Testament, calling on the name of the Lord was first mentioned by Peter, here, on the day of Pentecost, as the fulfillment of Joel's prophecy... Calling on the Lord's name is vitally necessary in order for us, the believers in Christ, to participate in and enjoy the all-inclusive Christ with all He has accomplished, attained, and obtained (1 Cor. 1:2). It is a major practice in God's New Testament economy that enables us to enjoy the processed Triune God for our full salvation (Rom. 10:10-13)…
The Greek word for call on is composed of on and call (by name); thus, it is to call out audibly, even loudly, as Stephen did (7:59-60).

Let’s examine the first sentence of WL’s footnote about calling on the name of the Lord. Notice the word practice. This word is suggestive. Before any commentary has even been made on the verse, the footnote has already asserted that calling on the name of the Lord is, above anything else, a practice. Now look at the phrase not a new practice. I’ve never heard anyone outside the LC claim that the phrase in Acts 2:21 represents a “new practice,” however, WL seems to have thought so. Maybe that's because a newcomer to LC meetings might be surprised by a “new practice” in LC meetings. So the footnote is subtly hinting that what is being practiced in the LC is not 'new', but supposedly a Biblical practice with precedent dating back to Genesis.

Gen 4:26 And as for Seth, to him also a son was born; and he named him Enosh. Then men began to call on the name of the LORD.

Originally Posted by Barnes Notes on the Bible

The closing sentence signalizes a remarkable event, which took place at the birth of Enosh, about two hundred and forty years after the creation of Adam. "Then was it begun to call upon the name of the Lord." The solemn invocation of God by his proper name in audible and social prayer and praise is the most usual meaning of the phrase now before us, and is to be adopted unless there be something in the context or the circumstances demanding another meaning. This involves also the first of the meanings given above, as we call God by his name in oral worship. It includes the third in one of its forms, as in praise we proclaim the name of our God. And it leads to the second, as those who call on the name of the Lord are themselves called the children of God.

Some change is here intimated in the mode of approaching God in worship. The gist of the sentence, however, does not lie in the name "Yahweh". For this term was not then new in itself, as it was used by Eve at the birth of Cain; nor was it new in this connection, as the phrase now appears for the first time, and Yahweh is the ordinary term employed in it ever afterward to denote the true God. As a proper name, Yahweh is the fit and customary word to enter into a solemn invocation. It is, as we have seen, highly significant. It speaks of the Self-existent One, the Author of all existing things, and in particular of man; the Self-manifest, who has shown himself merciful and gracious to the returning penitent, and with him keeps promise and covenant. Hence, it is the custom itself of calling on the name of Yahweh, of addressing God by his proper name, which is here said to have been commenced.

I could quote other commentaries too, but I will save the space. There is general agreement that the phrase calling on the name of the Lord denotes worship. There is no evidence to indicate it denotes a literal practice of repeating or proclaiming a phrase. Even the context itself is indicative of that.

Gen 12:18 And he moved from there to the mountain east of Bethel, and he pitched his tent with Bethel on the west and Ai on the east; there he built an altar to the LORD and called on the name of the LORD.

When Abraham built an alter to the Lord, that predicated his worship of the Lord. Wouldn’t it seem a bit odd if all that was just so he could repeatedly shout something like “praise the Lord”? To me, what Abraham did is suggestive of a much deeper worship. Something more serious.

Rom 10:9-10 that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved.
For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you profess your faith and are saved.
Rom 10:13 For “whoever calls on the name of the LORD shall be saved.”

In this set of verses, Paul talks about two actions relating to salvation 1) confessing with your mouth and 2) believing in your heart. It is after this that he quotes Joel. So according to the context of what Paul was talking about here, it would be absurd to claim that Rom 10:13 talks about a simple and literal proclamation. For sure, someone could profess “Jesus is Lord,” but there the aspect of believing in your heart. Salvation isn’t a mere proclamation. Belief (faith) is the other half. So again, I think this would necessitate that we move away from any literal ideas about calling on the name of the Lord, being a simple proclamation. I'm not saying there's anything wrong with proclamations, but salvation requires faith. A profession of faith, such saying a phrase like "Jesus is Lord," is not faith itself, it is just 1/2 of the equation. Faith in the heart.