Tafsir of Al-A'raf 7:5

i.e., their calling and their seeking of succor, as in His saying, the Exalted: {And the last of their call (da‘wahum)}, and the saying of some Arabs—as related by al-Khalil and Sibawayh—"O Allah, make us partake in the righteous call (da‘wa) of the Muslims," or their claiming, as is the well-known meaning of da‘wa.

{إِذْ جَاءَهُمْ بَأْسُنَا} i.e., Our punishment, when they witnessed its signs.

{إِلَّا أَنْ قَالُوا إِنَّا كُنَّا ظَالِمِينَ} i.e., except for their confession of their wrongdoing regarding what they were upon, and their bearing witness to its falsehood, out of anguish, remorse, or in the hope of deliverance—yet how far that is! It is no time for salvation. In making this confession identical to that calling [therein mentioned], there is hyperbole, akin to the saying: "Their greeting among them was a painful blow."

As for {دَعْوَاهُمْ}, it is permissible, as Abu al-Baqa’ stated, for it to be the noun of kāna and the predicate to be {إِلَّا أَنْ قَالُوا}, or for it to be the predicate and {إِلَّا أَنْ قَالُوا} to be the noun. The second view is preferred on the grounds that making the most definite (al-a‘raf) the noun is standard in their speech, and the verbal noun here resembles a pronoun in that it is not qualified, and it is more definite than that which is annexed. An objection was raised against this: when both the noun and the predicate are definite and their declension is not apparent, it is not permissible to place one before the other, so the first view becomes necessary. The response to this is that this applies only in the absence of evidence (qarinah); here, the evidence is that the second [element] is more definite, and the omission of the feminine marker [in the verb]. Furthermore, that [rule] applies when there is no restriction (hasr); if there is, one considers what it necessitates. In al-Kashf, the second view is preferred as being the one that corresponds to its parallels in the Quran. The meaning is more appropriate according to it, because the premise is that no other statement occupied this position; thus, the intention is to rule upon that specific statement as being the calling, reinforced by the inclusion of the restrictive particle. It is not a matter of precedence in any way, for the right of that which is restricted (al-maqsur ‘alayh) is always to be deferred. So contemplate and remember.