2 Thessalonians 3:6

The apostle having commended their obedience for the time past, and mentioned his confidence in their obedience for the time to come, proceeds to give them commands and directions to some who were faulty, correcting some things that were amiss among them. Observe, The best society of Christians may have some faulty persons among them, and some things that ought to be reformed. Perfection is not to be found on this side heaven: but evil manners beget good laws; the disorders that Paul heard of as existing among the Thessalonians occasioned the good laws we find in these verses, which are of constant use to us, and all others whom they may concern. Observe,

I. That which was amiss among the Thessalonians, which is expressed,

1. More generally. There were some who walked disorderly, not after the tradition they received from the apostle, Th2 3:6. Some of the brethren were guilty of this disorderly walking; they did not live regularly, nor govern themselves according to the rules of Christianity, nor agreeably to their profession of religion; not according to the precepts delivered by the apostle, which they had received, and pretended to pay a regard to. Note, It is required of those who have received the gospel, and who profess a subjection to it, that they live according to the gospel. If they do not, they are to be counted disorderly persons.

2. In particular, there were among them some idle persons and busy-bodies, Th2 3:11. This the apostle was so credibly informed of that he had sufficient reason to give commands and directions with relation to such persons, how they ought to behave, and how the church should act towards them. (1.) There were some among them who were idle, not working at all, or doing nothing. It does not appear that they were gluttons or drunkards, but idle, and therefore disorderly people. It is not enough for any to say they do no hurt; for it is required of all persons that they do good in the places and relations in which Providence has placed them. It is probable that these persons had a notion (by misunderstanding some passages in the former epistle) concerning the near approach of the coming of Christ, which served them for a pretence to leave off the work of their callings, and live in idleness. Note, It is a great error, or abuse of religion, to make it a cloak for idleness or any other sin. If we were sure that the day of judgment were ever so near, we must, notwithstanding, do the work of the day in its day, that when our Lord comes he may find us doing. The servant who waits for the coming of his Lord aright must be working as his Lord has commanded, that all may be ready when he comes. Or, it may be, these disorderly persons pretended that the liberty wherewith Christ had made them free discharged them from the services and business of their particular callings and employments in the world: whereas they were to abide in the same calling wherein they were called of God, and therein abide with God, Co1 7:20, Co1 7:24. Industry in our particular callings as men is a duty required of us by our general calling as Christians. Or perhaps the general charity there was then among Christians to their poor brethren encouraged some to live in idleness, as knowing the church would maintain them: whatever was the cause, they were much to blame. (2.) There were busy-bodies among them: and it should seem, by the connection, that the same persons who were idle were busy-bodies also. This may seem to be a contradiction; but so it is, that most commonly those persons who have no business of their own to do, or who neglect it, busy themselves in other men's matters. If we are idle, the devil and a corrupt heart will soon find us something to do. The mind of man is a busy thing; if it be not employed in doing good, it will be doing evil. Note, Busy-bodies are disorderly walkers, such as are guilty of vain curiosity, and impertinent meddling with things that do not concern them, and troubling themselves and others with other men's matters. The apostle warns Timothy (Ti1 5:13) to beware of such as learn to be idle, wandering about from house to house, and are not only idle, but tatlers also, and busy-bodies, speaking things which they ought not.

II. The good laws which were occasioned by these evil manners, concerning which we may take notice,

1. Whose laws they are: they are commands of the apostles of our Lord, given in the name of their Lord and ours, that is, the commands of our Lord himself. We command you, brethren, in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, Th2 3:6. Again, We command and exhort you by our Lord Jesus Christ, Th2 3:12. The apostle uses words of authority and entreaty: and, where disorders are to be rectified or prevented, there is need of both. The authority of Christ should awe our minds to obedience, and his grace and goodness should allure us.

2. What the good laws and rules are. The apostle gives directions to the whole church, commands to those disorderly persons, and an exhortation to those in particular who did well among them.

(1.) His commands and directions to the whole church regard, [1.] Their behaviour towards the disorderly persons who were among them, which is thus expressed (Th2 3:6), to withdraw themselves from such, and afterwards to mark that man, and have no company with him, that he may be ashamed; yet not to count him as an enemy, but to admonish him as a brother. The directions of the apostle are carefully to be observed in our conduct towards disorderly persons. We must be very cautious in church-censures and church-discipline. We must, First, Note that man who is suspected or charged with not obeying the word of God, or walking contrary thereto, that is, we must have sufficient proof of his fault before we proceed further. We must, Secondly, Admonish him in a friendly manner; we must put him in mind of his sin, and of his duty; and this should be done privately (Mat 18:15); then, if he will not hear, we must, Thirdly, Withdraw from him, and not keep company with him, that is, we must avoid familiar converse and society with such, for two reasons, namely, that we may not learn his evil ways; for he who follows vain and idle persons, and keeps company with such, is in danger of becoming like them. Another reason is for the shaming, and so the reforming, of those that offend, that when idle and disorderly persons see how their loose practices are disliked by all wise and good people they may be ashamed of them, and walk more orderly. Love therefore to the persons of our offending brethren, even when we hate their vices, should be the motive of our withdrawing from them; and even those who are under the censures of the church must not be accounted as enemies (Th2 3:15); for, if they be reclaimed and reformed by these censures, they will recover their credit and comfort, and right to church-privileges as brethren. [2.] Their general conduct and behaviour ought to be according to the good example the apostle and those who were with him had given them: Yourselves know how you ought to follow us, Th2 3:7. Those who planted religion among them had set a good example before them; and the ministers of the gospel should be ensamples to the flock. It is the duty of Christians not only to walk according to the traditions of the apostles, and the doctrines they preached, but also according to the good example they set before them, to be followers of them so far as they were followers of Christ. The particular good example the apostle mentions was their diligence, which was so different from what was found in the disorderly walkers he takes notice of: "We behaved not ourselves disorderly among you (Th2 3:7), we did not spend our time idly, in idle visits, idle talk, idle sports." They took pains in their ministry, in preaching the gospel, and in getting their own living. Neither did we eat any man's bread for nought, Th2 3:8. Though he might justly have demanded a maintenance, because those who preach the gospel may of right expect to live by the gospel. This is a just debt that people owe to their ministers, and the apostle had power or authority to have demanded this (Th2 3:9); but he waived his right from affection to them, and for the sake of the gospel, and that he might be an example for them to follow (Th2 3:9), that they might learn how to fill up time, and always be employed in something that would turn to good account.

(2.) He commands and directs those that live idle lives to reform, and set themselves to their business. He had given commandments to this purport, as well as a good example of this, when he was among them: Even when we were with you, this we commanded you, that if any man would not work neither should he eat, Th2 3:10. It was a proverbial speech among the Jews, He who does not labour does not deserve to eat. The labourer is worthy of his meat; but what is the loiterer worthy of? It is the will of God that every man should have a calling, and mind his calling, and make a business of it, and that none should live like useless drones in the world. Such persons do what in them lies to defeat the sentence, In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat thy bread. It was not the mere humour of the apostle, who was an active stirring man himself and therefore would have every body else to be so too, but it was the command of our Lord Jesus Christ, that with quietness we work, and eat our own bread, Th2 3:12. Men ought some way or other to earn their own living, otherwise they do not eat their own bread. Observe, There must be work or labour, in opposition to idleness; and there must be quietness, in opposition to being busy-bodies in other men's matters. We must study to be quiet, and do our own business. This is an excellent but rare composition, to be of an active yet quiet spirit, active in our own business and yet quiet as to other people's.

(3.) He exhorts those that did well not to be weary in well-doing (Th2 3:13); as if he had said, "Go on and prosper. The Lord is with you while you are with him. See that whatever you do, that is good, you persevere therein. Hold on your way, and hold out to the end. You must never give over, nor tire in your work. It will be time enough to rest when you come to heaven, that everlasting rest which remains for the people of God."

Matthew Henry's Commentary on the Whole Bible (1708–1710) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

(6) We command you.—The practical conclusion of the letter. These words take up the expression in 2Th_3:4, “Ye will do the things which (at any time) we command you; now the thing which we command you is this.”

In the name of our Lord.—To do anything in a person’s name seems to mean, in the first instance, the actual pronouncing of the name in the performance of the action—to do it name on lip, just as to “come in a rod” (1Co_4:21) literally means rod in hand. Thus, miracles are commonly said to be performed “in the name of the Lord,” viz., with the audible repetition of His name (for instance, Mat_7:22, Mar_16:17; Luk_10:17); and for examples of the way in which the name was literally so used, we may refer to Act_3:6; Act_9:34; Act_19:13—in the last case the name being employed as a mere incantation or charm. See also Php_2:10, where, as the adoration paid to Jesus Himself is the point, the phrase must mean, “mentioning the name of Jesus, every knee shall bow.” From this mention of the name in performing an action, our phrase assumes, at any rate, two distinct meanings: (1) As in Col_3:17, it implies an invocation or attestation of the person named, or a recognition of his presence and interest in the matter, in which sense it has passed into the common language of Christianity, into legal formulas, &c. (2) Here, and usually, it means a claim to the authority of the person named—to act officially as his representative with full powers. (See Notes on Joh_14:13; Joh_14:26.) Thus the prophets spoke “in the name of the Lord”—i.e., as His authoritative exponents (Jas_5:10); St. Paul commands (Act_16:18), and retains a man’s sins (1Co_4:5) “in the name of the Lord”—i.e., as His official spokesman or ambassador; the priests are to administer the unction of the sick with like authority (Jas_5:14-15). So here, the Thessalonians are not to think that in disobeying St. Paul’s injunctions they are rebelling against a mere human authority; Christ Himself speaks to them through St. Paul’s lips. Yet, commanding with all this tremendous authority, they are still but “brethren” (Mat_23:8).

Withdraw yourselves.—The striking word here used is (in its simple form) only found besides in 2Co_8:20 : “avoiding this.” In a still more striking compound, it occurs in Act_20:20; Act_20:27; Gal_2:12; Heb_10:38. It is a metaphor from the language of strategy a cautious general shrinking from an encounter and timidly drawing off under cover. Perhaps, we might illustrate it by the familiar English “fight shy of every brother.” A social excommunication rather than ecclesiastical seems chiefly meant, though the latter might perhaps be involved.

From every brother—i.e., every Christian. It was impossible to be so strict about the outside world. (Comp. 1Co_5:10-11.) The man still remains a “brother” (2Th_3:15).

Disorderly.—The word is rendered “unruly” in 1Th_5:14, and is possibly suggested by the military metaphor above. It means properly “out of rank.” The kind of irregularity which is meant is made clear by 2Th_3:10-11. The worthy Bengel quaintly makes this an opportunity for denouncing the Mendicant Orders: “An order of mendicants, then, is not an order; if the Thessalonians had bound themselves to it by a vow, what would St. Paul have said?”

The tradition.—See Note on 2Th_2:15. The word must imply systematic and definite teaching; and we see here again that a clear code of ethics was part of the apostolic catechism. (See Note on 1Th_4:1)

He received.—The best rendering is, which they received—i.e., all the brethren who walked disorderly. The word “receive” is the regular correlative to “tradition” or “deliver.” (See, e.g., Mar_7:4; 1Co_11:23; Gal_1:9; Col_2:6.)

A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

6. Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ] Or, But we charge you, brethren. See note, 2Th_3:4.

St Paul has declared his confidence that the readers will do what he enjoins. Well! his injunction is this: that you withdraw yourselves from every brother walking disorderly. It is uttered “in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ,”—a solemn judicial sentence (comp. 1Co_5:4-5) pronounced by the Apostle who acts as judge in his Sovereign’s name, and with the deepest sense of his responsibility; similarly, “through the Lord Jesus” in 1Th_4:2 (see note).

He does not wish these troublesome persons to be expelled; nor does he invoke supernatural penalties upon them, as in the vastly worse case of discipline at Corinth; he directs the loyal Thessalonians not to associate with them, nor lend countenance in any way to their proceedings. On “walk,” see note to 1Th_2:12; and on “disorderly,” 2Th_3:7; 1Th_5:14.

The rule of order or disorder in the case in question is thus laid down: and not after the tradition which they received of us (R.V.).

“They received” is the older reading, referring to the class of persons just described as “every brother walking disorderly.” This slight grammatical discord the ancient copyists corrected, some by writing “ye received” (R.V. margin), and others “he received” (A.V.).

On tradition (or instruction), see note to ch. 2Th_2:15. The nature of Paul’s “tradition” at Thessalonica on Christian behaviour may be gathered from the verses that follow, and from 1Th_2:9-12; 1Th_4:1-12; 1Th_5:12-24. It consisted of example equally with precept:—

Section V. Discipline for the Disorderly

Ch. 2Th_3:6-15

In his former letter St Paul had found it needful to exhort his readers to live a quiet life and to attend to their daily duties and pursuits. Some members of the Church were of an idle and improvident disposition. The Day of the Lord, they supposed, was imminent, and worldly occupations would therefore soon be at am end; the only business worth minding any longer, so they said, was to prepare for His coming. Their conduct was likely to bring discredit on the whole community; and they did it a material injury, by throwing the burden of their maintenance on their hard working and charitable brethren (see notes on 1Th_4:11-12). These men were “the disorderly” of 1Th_5:12-14 (comp. 2Th_3:7-8 below); they gave trouble to the officers of the Church, whom the Apostle in the First Epistle urges the Thessalonians loyally to support (ch. 1Th_5:12), while they united to “admonish” the offenders. This evil, which should have been checked by the reproofs of the first letter, had grown to larger proportions. The startling announcements that were made respecting the Second Advent, tended to aggravate the mischief. Indeed these rumours so unhinged the minds of some of the Thessalonian Christians, that it must have been difficult for them, however diligently inclined, to pursue their common avocations. And the Apostle, having calmed the agitation of his readers by what he has written in the second chapter, proceeds now in strong terms to rebuke the disorder which had thus been unhappily fostered and stimulated.

The chief points in St Paul’s charge on this subject are the following:—(1) First, and last, he enjoins the avoidance of those who persist in disorder, 2Th_3:6; 2Th_3:14 (whom notwithstanding he still, and pointedly, calls “brethren,” 2Th_3:6; 2Th_3:15); (2) he recalls his personal example and teaching in their bearing on this matter, 2Th_3:7-10; and (3) he solemnly charges the offenders to amend, 2Th_3:12.

The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Now we command you, brethren - The apostle now 2Th 3:6-12 turns to an important subject - the proper method of treating those who were idle and disorderly in the church. In the previous Epistle he had adverted to this subject, but in the mild language of exhortation. When he wrote that Epistle he was aware that there were some among them who were disposed to be idle, and he had tenderly exhorted them “to be quiet, and to mind their own business, and to work with their own hands;” 1Th 4:11. But it seems the exhortation, and the example of Paul himself when there 1Th 2:9, had not been effectual in inducing them to be industrious. It became, therefore, necessary to use the strong language of command, as he does here, and to require that if they would not work, the church should withdraw from them. What was the original cause of their idleness, is not known. There seems no reason, however, to doubt that it was much increased by their expectation that the Saviour would soon appear, and that the world would soon come to an end. If this was to be so, of what use would it be to labor? Why strive to accumulate property with reference to the wants of a family, or to a day of sickness, or old age? Why should a man build a house that was soon to be burnt up, or why buy a farm which he was soon to leave? The effect of the expectation of the speedy appearing of the Lord Jesus has always been to induce men to neglect their worldly affairs, and to lead idle lives. Man, naturally disposed to be idle, wants the stimulus of hope that he is laboring for the future welfare of himself, for his family, or for society, nor will he labor if he believes that the Saviour is about to appear.

In the name of the Lord Jesus Christ - see the notes on 1Co 5:4. “That ye withdraw yourselves;” see the notes on 1Ti 6:5. This is the true notion of Christian discipline. It is not primarily that of cutting a man off, or denouncing him, or excommunicating him; it is that of withdrawing from him. We cease to have fellowship with him. We do not regard him any longer as a Christian brother. We separate from him. We do not seek to affect him in any other respect; we do not injure his name or standing as a man, or hold him up to reprobation; we do not follow him with denunciation or a spirit of revenge; we simply cease to recognise him as a Christian brother, when he shows that he is no longer worthy to be regarded as such. We do not deliver him over to the civil arm; we do not inflict any positive punishment on him; we leave him unmolested in all his rights as a citizen, a man, a neighbor, a husband, a father, and simply say that he is no longer one of us as a Christian. How different is this from excommunication, as it has been commonly understood! How different from the anathemas fulminated by the papacy, and the delivering of the heretic over to the civil power!

From every brother that walketh disorderly - compare the notes, 1Co 5:11-13. A “disorderly walk” denotes conduct that is in any way contrary to the rules of Christ. The proper idea of the word used here (ἀτάκτως ataktōs), is that of soldiers who do not keep the ranks; who are regardless of order; and then who are irregular in any way. The word would include any violation of the rules of Christ on any subject.

And not after the tradition which ye received of us - According to the doctrine which we delivered to you; see the notes on 2Th 2:15. This shows that by the word “tradition” the apostle did not mean unwritten doctrines handed down from one to another, for he evidently alludes to what he had himself taught them, and his direction is not that that should be handed down by them, but that they should obey it.

Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

2Th_3:6

Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly

Apostolic authority

I.

The needs be for this command. Rather abruptly, the Apostle turns from a very important and pleasant subject to one of a totally different character--the proper method of treating those who were idle and disorderly in the Church. He had adverted to this subject in his previous epistle, but in the mild language of exhortation. When he wrote to the Thessalonians, he was aware that there were some among them who were disposed to be idle, and he had tenderly exhorted them to be quiet, and to mind their own business, and to work with their own hands. But it seems that the exhortation, and the example of Paul himself when at Thessalonica, had not been effectual in inducing them to be industrious. It, therefore, became necessary to use the strong language of command, and to require that if any members would not work, the Church should take due action concerning them. What was the original cause of their idleness is not known. There seems no reason, however, to doubt that it was much increased by their expectation that the Saviour would soon appear, and that the world would soon come to an and. If this was to be so, of what use would it be to labour? Why strive to accumulate property with reference to the wants of a family, or to a day of sickness, or to the requirements of old age? Why should a man build a house that was soon to be burnt up? Or why buy a farm which he was soon to leave? The effect of the expectation of the speedy coming of the Lord Jesus has alway been to induce men to neglect their worldly affairs, and lead idle lives. Man, naturally disposed to be idle, wants the stimulus of hope that he is labouring for the future weal of himself, his family, or society; nor will he labour if he believes that the Lord is just about to appear.

II. The authority for the command. In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, says the Apostle, using all the appellations of his Divine Master to stamp his mandate with full authority. By thus using the name, he means that he was acting on the behalf of Christ, or by His commission or power (Act_3:6; 2Co_2:10). A judge occupies the seat of justice on behalf of the monarch who rules the kingdom, and pronounces judgment in his stead on the guilty. But St. Pauls authority was higher than that from the kings of the earth; it was authority derived from the Divine Head of the Church, and his command therefore was paramount.

III. The matter of the command. That ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly, and not after the tradition which he received of us. This is the true notion of Christian discipline toward an erring member. Cease to have fellowship with him: do not regard him any longer as a Christian brother. No effort to affect him in any other respect must be made: neither name nor standing must be injured; nor must he be held up to reprobation, or followed with a spirit of revenge. When he shows that he is no longer worthy to be recognized as a Christian brother, leave him to himself and his God. Peradventure God may bring him to repentance. (A. Barnes, D. D.)

Withdrawal from the disorderly

The striking word withdraw is, in its simple form, found only besides in 2Co_8:20. In a still more striking compound it occurs in Act_20:20-27; Gal_2:12; Heb_10:38. It is a metaphor from the language of strategy; a cautious general shrinking from an engagement and timidly drawing off under cover. Perhaps we might illustrate it by the familiar fight shy. A social excommunication rather than ecclesiastical seems chiefly meant, though the latter might be involved. The word disorderly is rendered unruly in 1Th_5:14. The kind of irregularity is made clear in verses 10, 11. Bengel quaintly makes this an opportunity for denouncing the Mendicant Orders. An order of mendicants is not an order; if the Thessalonians had bound themselves to it by a vow, what would Paul have said? (Canon Mason.)

Withdrawal from such as walk disorderly

1. The matter of the text is separation from those that walk out of line, and keep not their ranks: a word borrowed from military discipline, which requires every soldier to march in his file. But because there can be no irregularity without a rule, and no disorder where no orders have been given, the Apostle explains that he means those who walk not after the tradition, etc., i.e., the doctrine of the apostle. The following therefore are branded--

(1) All who commit gross wickedness (1Ti_6:3).

(2) All who are erroneous and heretical. Others transgress, these destroy the rule.

(3) Turbulent and factions persons: such as rend the Church, and despise government because not of their own devising.

(4) Idle and impertinent tattlers and tale bearers (verse 11).

2. To this we are bound by an express and urgent command, on authority the most absolute and sovereign; but we are reminded that the sinner is still a brother.

I. State the duty.

1. Cases wherein we are not bound to with draw from them that walk disorderly.

(1) In the management of civil affairs, and whatever is necessary for subsistence. This was allowed to Christians among heathens, and cannot be denied to us among ungodly professors.

(2) So as to violate the bonds of nature, or the respects which are due to them. A godly son must not withdraw himself from the authority of a wicked father; those unequally yoked must not therefore relinquish their relation or neglect its duties; nor servants reject the commands of profane masters. Dominion is not founded in grace, and it would be a wild world if inferiors should acknowledge no superiors but such as are cordially subject to God. No: we ought to converse with all persons according to the relations in which we stand to them.

(3) When we have great hopes and strong probabilities of reforming them. This is to act the physician, and to follow the example of Christ (Mat_11:19; Mat_9:12). Yet two cautions must be observed.

(a) Watchfulness over the heart and actions when in wicked company even with a design of doing good, else we may get the infection instead of curing it.

(b) That we venture not unless we have good grounds for the hope that we shall do them good. This we may expect if we have prudence enough to divert them, authority enough to affright them, or reverence enough to overawe and shame them. Otherwise it is hazardous whether we shall keep our conscience safe or maintain our zeal.

(4) In the service of God. We may join them in prayer and ordinances, and be glad that they give religion any, though only a complimental, respect. The great scruple is concerning the Lords Supper. But--

(a) Christ ate with Judas (Luk_22:20-21; Mar_14:23).

(b) Admitting the contention, your duty is not to withdraw yourselves but to remove them.

If you have followed out Mat_18:15-16, the offender will be removed by the proper authority, or if not you do not partake of his sin by partaking of the same ordinance.

2. Cases in which we are bound to withdraw.

(1) From all unnecessary converse. We are not to make them our bosom friends.

(2) We are to withdraw from them our inward respect and esteem (Psa_15:4). How can we value the companionship of the Devils slaves, however bedecked, and esteem these whom God condemns?

(3) This inward dislike should be manifested, at least so far as to show that we have very different feelings for true Christians. But here let us beware of running into extremes, and mistake a proud disdain for a holy dislike and by the sourness of our converse fright them from our converse and our religion too.

(a) We ought to distinguish between our brothers person and his vices, and neither hate nor love the one for the other. He who loves his person for his vices is a devil; he who loves his vices for his person is a flatterer; he who hates his vices for his person is a murderer; and he who hates his person for his vices is unchristian (Lev_19:17). This duty is difficult, and can only be done by using the utmost efforts to reclaim our brother, for thereby we express our hatred of his sins by seeking to destroy them, and our love for his person by seeking to save him.

(b) We must not withdraw the civility which is due to his station, nor refuse the offices of humanity. The one is not religion but rudeness, and the other unnatural. Religion teaches not churlishness but obligingness.

II. Reasons to enforce this duty.

1. It is an act of the greatest love to their persons. We are not to separate out of spite or peevishness, but out of goodwill, it being the last and probably the most effectual means of reclaiming them (verse 14).

2. It is an act of self-protection. There is no plague so catching as sin, for--

(1) Our hearts are naturally corrupt.

(2) It is the glory of wicked men to rub their vices on as many as they can. They would make all like themselves.

(3) Our society with them may involve us not only in their guilt but in their punishment (Pro_13:20; Num_16:26; Rev_18:4).

(4) If no other punishment overtake you, yet their very society must be a burden to the conscientious Christian (Psa_57:4; Psa_120:5).

(5) Our converse with them must be a great hindrance from doing our duty.

(6) We have other company to keep, and need not be beholden to the wicked for society--the good, our own consciences, God.

III. Application. Ought we to withdraw from those that walk disorderly? Then--

1. Let not wicked men condemn conscientious Christians as though they were proud or unsociable.

2. Let this serve to break all combinations of wicked men. God has prescribed this rule, and converse not regulated by it is conspiracy against heaven. Flee then from wicked companions.

3. See the misery of the wicked. They are deemed unfit for Christian society on earth, much more for that society in heaven.

4. Christians! be exhorted to withdraw.

(1) Get your hearts off those things in which the wicked abound.

(2) Be as little beholden to them as possible.

(3) Let them see your courage and resolution.

4. Christians I so demean yourselves that the wicked shall see that your company is the more desirable.

(1) Let your practice be agreeable to your profession. This brings great credit to religion.

(2) Labour to outstrip the wicked in those things in which they gain the affections of others.

(a) Some pretend to be very exact in giving every one his due--and triumph over those professors who do not.

(b) Others brag of their courtesy and affability.

(c) Others of their love and agreement among themselves.

(d) Others of their charity and good works. (E. Hopkins, D. D.)

Withdrawal from the disorderly

A military metaphor lies in the latter word (1Th_5:14). It describes the unruly as men who are not in their places in the ranks of the Christian army, men who are setting aside the strict rules of discipline, thereby causing disorder and courting disaster. In every such case of insubordination the offender is to be first warned (1Th_5:14); but continued contumacy is to be punished by withdrawal. In this word some see a nautical figure, suitable to a maritime and commercial community like the Thessalonians, and we have such a figure in 2Th_2:2. It would thus mean, As you take in your sails to steer clear of a rock or reef, so give a wide berth to every disorderly brother. He and all like him are hidden rocks of danger (Jud_1:12, R.V.). But it is better to take the metaphor as military, and a natural continuation of the previous one. Thus understood it suggests a strategic movement--the withdrawing, prudent and cautious, but not necessarily timid, on the part of a general with his soldiers from the enemy. It is wise to withdraw from such stragglers out of the ranks; they give the Christian army a bad name, they exert a bad influence, lower the general feeling, and retard progress. They have, therefore, to be avoided even more than if they were openly ranged on the opposite side. They are the most dangerous of foes who belong to the ranks and yet are out of them. It is the disorderly brother and not the heathen who is to be shunned; yet although thus severely treated, he is to be looked upon as a brother after all (2Th_2:15). (J. Hutchison, D. D.)

Coming clear out

Ko-san-lone, a converted Chinese, when in America on a visit, was deeply impressed with the little difference he saw between the style of living of many professing Christians and the people of the world. Adverting to the matter on one occasion, he said, making at the same time a large sweep with his arm, When the disciples in my country come out from the world, they come clear out.

The Biblical Illustrator, edited by Joseph S. Exell (c. 1880s–1900s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

2Th 3:6-12. We command you, brethren — We solemnly charge you; in the name of the Lord. (see on 1Co 5:4,) the credit and progress of whose religion are so nearly concerned in the matter; that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother — Whatever his rank, circumstances, or profession may be; that walketh disorderly — Particularly (as the apostle here means) in not working; that you have no unnecessary converse or society with such. Disorderly persons, ατακτοι, are they who profess to be subject to the discipline of the gospel, yet do not walk according to its precepts. See 1Th 5:14. What the apostle here condemned under this description, was idleness, 2Th 3:11; and by the solemnity with which he introduces his charge, we are taught, that it is most offensive to God, and dangerous to ourselves and others, to encourage, by our company and conversation, such as live in the practice of that or any gross sin! May all who have a regard to religion attend to this! The same important charge is repeated 2Th 3:14. And not after the tradition which ye received of us — The admonition we gave both by word of mouth and in our former epistle. Yourselves know how ye ought to follow — Μιμεισθαι, to imitate, us — As if he had said, My own conduct entitles me to rebuke the disorderly; for we behaved not ourselves disorderly among you — We were not irregular in our conduct, but endeavoured to conduct ourselves so as to recommend and enforce our doctrine by our example. Neither did we eat any man’s bread for naught — Greek, δωρεαν, gratis, or as a free gift, but wrought with labour and travail — Or toil, as μοχθω signifies: night and day — This intimates that the apostle was frequently obliged to work at his business of tent-making a part of the night, that he might be at leisure during the day to preach the word, and teach those that came to him for religious instruction. See on 1Th 2:9. Not because we have not power — Εξουσιαν, authority, or right, to receive a maintenance from those to whom we minister. See on 1Co 9:4-7. When our Lord first sent out the twelve to preach, he said to them, (Mat 10:10,) The workman is worthy of his meat; and by so saying conferred on his apostles a right to demand subsistence from those to whom they preached. This right Paul did not insist on among the Thessalonians, but wrought for his maintenance while he preached to them. Lest, however, his enemies might think this an acknowledgment that he was not an apostle, he here asserted his right, and told them that he had demanded no maintenance from them, that he might make himself a pattern to them of prudent industry. This we commanded, that if any among you, capable of working, would not work — For his own maintenance; neither should he eat — Be maintained by the charity of his fellow-Christians; do not support him in idleness. From this precept of the gospel we learn, that all men, without distinction, ought to employ themselves in some business or other which is useful; and that no man is entitled to spend his life in idleness. We hear there are some, &c. — After writing the former epistle, the apostle, it seems, had received a particular account of the state of the Thessalonian church; working not at all, but are busy-bodies — Idleness naturally disposes people to busy themselves with the concerns of others. Such we command and exhort — Παρακαλουμεν, beseech; by our Lord Jesus — To his command the apostle added earnest entreaty; and he did so by the direction of Christ. Or the meaning may be, We command by the authority, and beseech by the love of our Lord Jesus, that with quietness they work, forbearing to meddle, in any shape, with other people’s affairs.

Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

6. Charge that idlers be required to become industrious or be disowned, 2Th_3:6-15.

When the apostle first came to Thessalonica he gave an example of manual labour, and gave special charge to his converts to be models of industry. This charge was made necessary, evidently, from the fact that some of his converts were from among the class of idlers, and needed the most stringent instruction that to be a Christian was to be a faithful performer of every secular and industrial duty. Yet as the gospel opened the hearts of the wealthier portion to liberal charities, the temptation became strong, after Paul’s departure, for the idler to avail himself of these means of support in idleness. The apostle, therefore, in his first epistle, (1Th_4:11-12,) gave them a gentle admonition. This failing, he now, in the most authoritative style, requires that these brethren correct or be disowned. He recalls his own example and previous precepts, and concludes with this solemn direct appeal to them.

Many standard commentators, as Olshausen, Lunemann, and Alford, maintain that the expectation of the immediate advent was the main cause of this idleness. But the only ground for such a supposition is the fact of the coexistence of the two things, namely, the expectation and the idleness. There is not one syllable in either epistle that connects the two things as cause and effect. On the contrary, the whole aspect of the case is the reverse. The idleness existed previous to the existence of the expectation. Paul exerted example and precept, at his first appearance among them, against it. In the first epistle the excitement of expectation had not risen, and yet the idleness existed. Nor does the quality of this idleness suit the expectation of an immediate advent. It was not a solemn giving over of business, and attending exclusively to religions exercises; nor even an overdone religious dissipation; but a lounging and gadding spirit of meddlesome gossip, impudently devouring the charities of the Church. Nor does St. Paul refer to the palpable inconsistency of such a spirit and conduct with the expectation of the immediate judgment, but grounds his solemn charge on the very nature of Christian duty, as if purposing to place honest secular industry—permanent and regular attention to business— among the cardinal virtues of Christianity.

Two periods of excitement in expectation of the advent on a specified day are memorable in American religious history. In the latter of these, which occurred within our own memory, there was an intense religious excitement, but no relaxation of business, and no increase of secular idleness. The evangelical Churches, especially those most exposed to the excitement, received large accessions of converts, followed by an immense diminution the year following. In a former generation in New England, under the preaching of an eloquent divine, named Austin, a day was fixed and a great excitement rose. The appointed day happened, in fact, to be characterized by a great darkness. The Legislature of Connecticut, it is said, was in session, and its members were in no little commotion. But the presiding officer addressed them substantially in the following terms: “Let us keep order, gentlemen; the judgment-day can find us in no better business than the discharge of our regular duties.”

6. Command you—An authoritative phrase, in Greek terms which are used by kings to their subjects or generals to their soldiers. These are now, our apostolic orders, solemnly enforced by being in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. These are his orders, by his representative apostle. Paul commences, severely, with charge to the Church to deal with the offenders, 6-11; delivers but a brief charge to the offenders themselves, 12, as he had on former occasions pretty much said his say to them; and then encourages the liberal part of the Church to continued duty, 13, 14.

Withdraw yourselves—The Christian people were to note, (2Th_3:14,) specialize, the individual, and withdraw themselves from any recognition or intercourse by which he was acknowledged as belonging to the Christian body—a passive expulsion of the offender. It was thus signified that no idler, able to work, yet sponging upon the industry of others, could be an accepted Christian.

Disorderly—Like a soldier wandering out of the ranks, and so destroying discipline.

Tradition—See note on 2Th_3:15.

Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

CRITICAL AND EXPLANATORY NOTES

2Th_3:6. Walketh disorderly.—Falling out of the ranks and desertion of the post of duty are grave faults, which if the esprit de corps do not prevent it must be punished by treating the defaulter as one who has discredited his comrades in arms.

2Th_3:7. We behaved not ourselves disorderly among you.—“We never lived an undisciplined life among you.” Men will bear the sharp rebukes of a martinet, even when they observe that he is as much under discipline as he would have the youngest recruit, as the lives of men like Havelock and Gordon testify.

MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.—2Th_3:6-7

Christian Consistency.

The apostle commended with a warm-hearted eulogy whatever was good in the Thessalonians, but he was not less faithful in administering rebuke when it was needed. A number of the converts, not sufficiently pondering the words of the writer, were carried away with the delusion that the second advent of Christ would take place immediately, and they abandoned all interest in the practical duties of life—an error that has been often repeated since, with similar results. Fearing the mischief would spread, and seeing that all previous warnings were disregarded, the apostle in these verses treats the mistaken enthusiasts with unsparing condemnation. Disorder must be crushed and consistency preserved.

I. Christian consistency is in harmony with the highest teaching.—“After the tradition which he [or they] received of us” (2Th_3:6). The rules of Christian consistency were clearly laid down in the traditions or doctrines taught by the apostles, and were enforced with all the weight and sanction of divine authority. To violate these rules is to “walk disorderly”—to break the ranks, to fall out of line. The value of the individual soldier is the degree in which he keeps in order and acts in perfect harmony and precision with the rest of the regiment. A breach of military rule creates disaster. Let the believer keep the divine law, and the law will keep him.

“The heavens themselves, the planets and this centre,

Observe degree, priority, and place,

Insisture, course, proportion, season, form,

Office and custom, in all line of order.”

Shakespeare.

II. Christian consistency is enforced by apostolic example.—“For yourselves know how ye ought to follow us: for we behaved not ourselves disorderly among you” (2Th_3:7). The apostles illustrated what they taught, by a rigid observance of the rules they imposed on others. Precept was enforced by practice. While the preachers laboured among the Thessalonians, the influence of their upright examples kept the Church in order. Much depends upon the conduct of a leader in Church or State. It is said of a certain military commander on taking charge of an army that had been somewhat lax in discipline: “The presence of a master-mind was quickly visible in the changed condition of the camp. Perfect order now reigned. He was a rigid disciplinarian, and yet as gentle and kind as a woman. He was the easiest man in our army to get along with pleasantly, so long as one did his duty, but as inexorable as fate in exacting its performance. He was as courteous to the humblest private who sought an interview for any purpose as to the highest officer under his command.”

III. Christian consistency is to be maintained by separation from the lawless.—“Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly” (2Th_3:6). If all efforts to recover the recalcitrant fail, then the Church has the highest authority for separating completely from the society and fellowship of such. Continued communion with them would not only seem to condone their offence, but destroy discipline, and put an end to all moral consistency. Such a separation from the unruly would be more marked in the early Church, when there was only one Christian community, and when the brethren were noted for their affectionate attachment to each other.

Lessons.—Christian consistency—

1. Is defined by the highest law.

2. Avoids association with evil.

3. Is a reproof and pattern to the unbelieving.

GERM NOTES ON THE VERSES

2Th_3:6-7. The Disorderly in Church Life—

I. Violate the rules that give compactness and strength to all Church organisation.

II. Ignore the highest examples of moral consistency.

III. Should be faithfully warned and counselled.

IV. If incorrigible, should be excluded from the privileges of Christian fellowship.

The Preacher's Complete Homiletical Commentary (gen. ed. Joseph S. Exell; Funk & Wagnalls, c. 1892) — public domain (pre-1929). A full-Bible homiletical/sermon-outline anthology covering 65 of 66 books (2 John is absent from the source module). Text from a community e-Sword module.

2. 2Th_3:6-16

He gives impressive directions as to the treatment of those, who will not desist from a pragmatical idleness

6Now [But]20 we command you, brethren, in the name of our21 Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh [walking, περιπατοῦντος] disorderly, and not after the tradition [according to the instruction]22 which he [they]23 received of [from, παρά] us. 7For yourselves know how ye ought to follow [imitate]24 us; for we behaved not ourselves disorderly [were not disorderly, οὐκ ἠτακτήσαμεν] among you; 8Neither did we eat any man’s bread [bread from any one, ἄρτον παρά τινος] for nought, but wrought with labor and travail night and day [but in toil and travail, working night and day],25 that we might not be chargeable [burdensome]26 to any of you: 9Not because we have not power [authority],27 but to make ourselves an ensample unto you to follow us [that we might give ourselves for a pattern unto you to imitate us].28 10For even [For also],29 when we were with you, this we commanded you, that if any [any one] would [will, θέλει] not work, neither should he eat [let him eat, ἐσθιέτω]. 11For we hear that there are some which walk [hear of some walking, ἀκούομεν γάρ τινας περιπατοῦντας] among you disorderly, working not at all, but are busybodies [being b., περιεργαζομένους]. 12Now them that are such [Now such, τοῖς δὲ τοιούτοις] we command and exhort by our Lord Jesus Christ [or: in the L. J. C.],30 that with quietness they work, and eat [working with quietness, they eat, μετὰ ἡσυχίας ἐργαζόμενοι … ἐσθίωσιν] their own bread. 13But ye, brethren, be not weary in31 in well-doing. 14And if any man [But if any one, εἰ δέ τις] obey not our word by this epistle [the ep.],32 note that man, and33 have no company 15with him, that he may be ashamed [shamed].34 Yet [And]35 count him not as an enemy, but admonish him, as a brother. 16Now the Lord of peace Himself give [But may the Lord of peace Himself give, αὐτὸς δὲ ὁ Κύριος … δῴη] you peace always by all means [in every way].36 The Lord be with you all.

EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL

1. (2Th_3:6.) But we command you, &c.—An adequate foundation having been laid, he conies now to speak of the matter specially in hand. The order is addressed to all the brethren, not, as Olshausen supposes, to the presbyters; Theodoret says merely, that the leaders of the Church must follow this rule. But the meaning of the Apostle is, in regard to all who are not themselves ἄτακτοι—all on whom he can rely, ὅτι ποιεῖτε καὶ ποιήσετε, &c. (2Th_3:4)—now to tell them what they have to do.—In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ is this command given; as representing Him, standing in Him, we command, have confidence to do so; Chrysostom: It is not we that say it, but the Lord speaks by us; He who has the right to enjoin, and the strength for execution; equivalent to 2Th_3:12 : in the Lord, or by the Lord; for the Lord Himself and His name are inseparable. Again, ὑμᾶς is not the object of στέλλεσθαι (this would not suit the middle voice), but the subject in the case of an accusative and infinitive; this occurs elsewhere only when the infinitive has a different accusative from the accusative or dative governed by the finite verb [comp. Act_1:4 with 1Co_7:10]; but here ὑμᾶς stands, because παραγγ. ὑμῖν is already somewhat too far removed from the infinitive. The expression στέλλεσθαι Hesychius explains by φοβεῖσθαι; Theodoret by χωρίζεσθαι. The idea starts from a sensuous point of view: timidly to withdraw; hence: to be afraid; 2Co_8:20, with τοῦτο; but in Mal_2:5 Sept. with από, in the sense: to be in fear of. Here this meaning is not suitable, since he is not exhorting them to fear, but directing a course of proceeding, the breaking off of intimate intercourse; Gal_2:12, ὑπέστελλεν ἑαυτόν (because in this case the middle is not used; the ὑπ implies secrecy37); akin to Rom_16:17, ἐκκλίνατε ἀπ’ αὐτῶν.—From every brother; no such discipline is to be exercised towards those without (1Co_5:11-12), but only towards those who desire to be called brethren. According to Mat_18:15 sqq. likewise a brother only is the object of Church discipline.—Walking disorderly, and not according to the tradition [instruction] (2Th_2:15) which they received from us, namely, the brethren, even those ἄτακτοι; comp. 1Th_2:13; 1Th_4:1. The receiving was through the medium of oral instruction, and this was confirmed by example (2Th_3:7). On the ἀτάκτως περιπ. see already at 1Th_4:11; 1Th_5:14, Here as little as there does it denote a life altogether unregulated by Divine law, and utterly vicious; 2Th_3:11 shows that those are rather meant, who without any occupation bustled around in fanatical idleness. Before giving this more precise description of them, he prefixes a still more exact confirmation of his demands. Disorder, connected probably with eschatological excitement (2Th_2:2), and with this Ewald would also join a mistaken appeal to a fraternal community of goods (1Th_4:9-12), must with some at least have been on the increase, in spite of the Apostle’s exhortation. For this reason Paul, over against the tender, lenient words of the First Epistle, now applies a second and sharper course of discipline. The point is, to act vigorously against the unreformed, in order to arrest the contagion, preserve the church, and, if possible, exert by means of the stronger measures a saving influence on the obstinate offenders themselves.

2. (2Th_3:7-9.) For ye yourselves know how ye ought to imitate us (1Th_1:6); ye know it by word and deed on our part; he thus justifies the reproach which he makes against them in regard to the παραδόσεις, by setting forth what they themselves knew.—For we were not disorderly (without occupation) among you; he thus confirms the assertion: ye know; we might also connect this, as well as πῶς, &c., and as an explanation of that, with οἴδατε: that we (that is to say) were not disorderly;38 so [Am. Bible Union] Hofmann, who even (clumsily) makes 2Th_3:9 still governed by ὅτι.—Neither did we eat bread from any one39 for nought; for nought, as a gift [Alford: there seems to be an allusion in the construction to the original sense of δωρεάν.—J. L.], without paying for it; he speaks humbly, as if labor in the gospel were no labor; that is the way, moreover, in which the worldly mind judges. It is a remark already of the Fathers, that it would not have been δωρεάν, had Paul even performed no manual labor. [See Mat_10:10; 1Co_15:10.—J. L.] Bread is the plain and main article of food; to eat bread, a Hebraism, אכל לחם (Gen_43:25; Luk_14:1), equivalent to the simple ἐσθίειν (2Th_3:10). Moreover, the German proverb also says: Whose bread I eat, &c.—But working in toil and travail night and day [But in toil and travail, working night and day],40 that is, we ate bread, De Wette would needlessly assume that the participle is used irregularly for the finite verb, or that ἦμεν is to be supplied, as at 2Co_7:5. Much more obvious in the present instance is the supplement ἐφάγομεν, so that ἐργαζόμ. form the antithesis to δωρεάν.—That we might not be burdensome to any of you; comp. 1Th_2:9 sqq.—(What I mean is) not that, or still better: (We did this) not because we have not authority, that is, to live of the gospel, or here, τοῦ δωρεὰν ἄρτον φαγεῖν, as in 1Co_9:6, τοῦ μὴ ἐργάζεσθαι; comp. the discussion in 1Co_9:4-14; Luk_10:7, the laborer is worthy of his hire.—That we might give ourselves for a pattern unto you (1Th_1:7) to imitate us; such was his object, comp. Act_20:35. Hilgenfeld will have it, that to give the churches in this way an example was merely the result of the apostolic labor, but could not be the original design, as the forger here asserts. But really one cannot see why the Apostle, who represents to us details of his life as providential, as in 1Co_1:14-15, might not much more readily say with perfect truth, that he had wished to train his churches also by his own example.

3. (2Th_3:10.) For also when we were with you; in confirmation of the example he says: For indeed we also (καὶ γάρ [see Critical Note 10]), when we were with you, commanded you that which our example showed you; command and example were harmonious. Lünemann [Alford] puts an improper emphasis on the τοῦτο, when he interprets thus: “For also this we commanded you”; with what other things? This distinction of several commands is here altogether an interpolation, and is besides contradicted by the verbal arrangement. Were we required by καί to seek for some other antithesis than the one indicated by us, it would be far more proper to understand the matter with Hofmann thus: For even when we were with you, already at that time, we commanded you; we do not now for the first time lay upon you a new yoke. At all events we perceive that already at his first visit Paul with keen pastoral insight saw the necessity of the warning. We commanded you, he speaks in the imperfect; this was our repeated order: that, if any one will not work, neither let him eat; if one would not work, as well as the Apostle who did double work, he did not at all deserve that food should be given him. If one will not, although he could; no reproach is cast on those unable to work; nolle vitium est, says Bengel. The word is a proverbial sentence, to which Grotivs and Wetstein adduce many parallels from the Greeks and Rabbins. We are not at ἐσθίειν to think in the first instance of the Holy Supper.

4. (2Th_3:11-12). For we hear, &c.—Paul explains why the command (2Th_3:10) was given.—Of some (not many, but even a few are a hurtful leaven, 1Co_5:6) walking among you disorderly; this is now explained, and that in an earnest word-play, already imitated, by Zwingli in the Swiss dialect: Sy thund nüt und thund zuvil [They do nothing, and do too much.—J. L.]; Calvin: nihil operis agentes, sed curiose satagentes; Ewald: nicht arbeit treibend, sondern sich herumtreibend.41 The περιεργάζεσθαι is, in fact, the phantom of a dutiful ἐργάζεσθαι; the giving up of one’s self to idle roving, to aimless bustle, to by-matters and other people’s concerns, with which we have properly nothing to do; instead of, as we ought, τὰ ἴδια πράσσειν (1Th_4:11). The adjective περίεργος is found 1Ti_5:13; comp. Act_19:19, τὰ περίεργα πράσσειν. Thus already in that time of freshest life there appeared this frivolous humor under the pretext of activity for the kingdom of God. A further stage of degeneracy is afterwards described in Php_3:19; Rom_16:18.—Now such (those who are of this sort) we command; addressing himself, though indirectly and in the third person, to those very persons; it was to be expected that all would be present at the reading of the letter (1Th_5:25), and that no one would avoid listening to it. He at once softens his language, and speaks still in a more kindly tone, as he also requires at 2Th_3:15 : and exhort; αὐτούς is now to be taken out of the dative τοιούτοις, by an obvious zeugma: in the Lord Jesus Christ; in Him our exhortation has its strength. If we read διά, then it is: by means of Him, while we avail ourselves of His name, and by His sacred person give impressiveness to our words: as you love the Lord Jesus, and fellowship with Him. The subject of the exhortation is expressed in the form of the object: that working with quietness they eat their own bread; ἡσυχία, comp. ἡσυχάζειν, 1Th_4:11, denotes rest, inward composure, retiredness, and avoidance of show, and stands opposed to περιεργάζεσθαι; their own bread, that is honestly earned, obtained by faithful and diligent labor with God’s blessing, not begged bread, implies therefore ἐργάζ., and stands in opposition to the δωρεάν of 2Th_3:8.

5. (2Th_3:13.) But ye, brethren; he thus turns once more to those free from blame, and them only he accosts with cordial address.—Be not weary, dispirited (2Co_4:1; 2Co_4:16); in all the New Testament instances we find the variation ἐγκακεῖν (written also ἐνκακεῖν) given by the oldest authorities, instead of ἐκκακεῖν. The sense, as developed by Passow, is at the most according to the etymological genesis slightly different (to be cowardly in anything, or to turn out cowardly),42 but in the end both come to the same thing; ἐκκακεῖν not being common elsewhere, the copyists probably introduced their familiar ἐγκ.—Become not disheartened in well-doing. Calvin, Estius, Pelt, De Wette, Ewald, Von Gerlach, and most others, refer the word to beneficence, and without question this thought would suit very well. That is to say, the Apostle, having in 2Th_3:10 forbidden a mistaken almsgiving, now glances also at the opposite danger. After many disturbing, discouraging experiences of dishonesty, unworthiness, sloth, abuse of kindnesses, it is necessary to check the growth of displeasure and distrust, lest those who are in real distress should have to suffer innocently. Chrysostom even remarks particularly, that Paul’s meaning is that the idle should be punished, but not left to famish; Theodoret: Bodily support is not to be withdrawn from the delinquents, any more than from sick members; others: They should be dealt with patiently, till they are trained to self-dependence. But Grotius, Bengel, Rieger, Olshausen, Lünemann, Hofmann [Alford, Wordsworth, Ellicott], properly object, that the meaning of καλοποιεῖν is wider and more comprehensive, namely, to act honorably; Lünemann: as is right and proper; Bengel: bene facientes, etiam manuum industria; comp. Gal_6:9; and in our Epistle substantially 2Th_1:11; 2Th_2:17. The same expositors, however, do again partially restrict the meaning in another way. Lünemann thinks that, since 2Th_3:14 shows that the discourse still turns on the same theme, we are to understand it thus: Be not discouraged, but persist in not allowing yourselves to be tainted by the evil example. Hofmann finds this too exclusively negative, and therefore takes the more exact definition this way: Become not weary in doing what is befitting, whatever, that is, conduces to the welfare of the moral community. To this we are able to assent, only with the remark, that we understand the phrase as comprehensively as possible—as including, therefore, both their own unblamable walk, steady, loving, earnest discipline (2Th_3:14-15), and also a due beneficence. Suffer not yourselves by any means to become weary in the performance of your duty; act in every way as followers of God (Mat_5:45; Starke).

[Lectures: After the solemn command and exhortation in the 12th verse to the idlers, the Apostle immediately turns round again to the sound portion of the church, and seeks first, before proceeding with his disciplinary instructions, to confirm them in their more consistent course. But ye, brethren, whatever others may do, and great as are your discouragements within the church, as well as from without, be not weary in doing what is right. Unaffected by these examples of a restless fanaticism and ignoble indolence, do still as you have done hitherto. Lead quiet and peaceable lives in all godliness and honesty. And, in particular, see to it that nothing in your own opinions or sentiments be suffered to interrupt the diligent prosecution of your lawful callings.—J. L.] Wisely, plainly, in few words, Paul says whatever is needful in all directions.

6. (2Th_3:14-15.) But if any one obey not, &c.—What has just been said is not to be understood in the sense of a spurious complaisance that does not do what is really good. Paul speaks with the authority of truth, though not so strongly moved, because the case is not so frightful, as in 1Co_5:1-5. The words διὰ τῆς ἐπιστ. are annexed by [Erasmus] Calvin, Luther, Grotius, Bengel, Pelt [the English margin], and others, to what follows. Luther: Note that man by a letter; and Winer as late as the 6th edition (18. 9, Note 3) marks this as at least a possible interpretation. But Olshausen, De Wette, Lünemann, Ewald, Hofmann [and most others] are with reason opposed to it, and connect the words (as is already done by Chrysostom, Theophylact, Beza) with what precedes. There are these objections to the first-mentioned interpretation: 1. The article, διὰ τῆς ἐπ. (wanting only in F. G.) is not naturally explained; Winer’s account of it: in the letter which you have then to write, which I then hope to receive from you, is certainly too artificial; and this the more so, because 2. διὰ τῆς ἐπ. from its prominent position would have an altogether unaccountable emphasis. But again, 3. the middle σημειοῦσθε would not be very suitable, since ἡμῖν might rather have been expected. And lastly, 4. as to the matter itself, it would be very strange, that Paul should have kept the churches in such a state of dependence, as to require an epistolary record of every offender, as if it were necessary that he should pronounce or at least sanction the punishment. Von Gerlach thinks that this happens only on account of the newness and inexperience of the church. Still what a paralysis of all self dependence would this have involved! How difficult also would it have been even to comply with the injunction, since Paul certainly was not stationary always in the same place. And having just told them how they were to proceed, is it to be supposed that he again takes the matter out of their hand? he, who in a far worse case reproaches the Corinthians for not having themselves interfered (1Co_5:2)? Everything, then, concurs against this explanation. But that of Bengel and Pelt is not tenable: By means of this letter (this very Second Epistle to the Thessalonians), relying on it, holding it forth to him, proceed against him; Bengel: notate (hunc) nota censoria; but this is not at all the import of σημειοῦσθε. Accordingly, διὰ τῆς ἐπιστ. must be closely connected with τῷ λόγῳ ἡμῶν, although the article τῷ is not repeated; it might be omitted (Winer, § 20:2), because the whole from τῷ to ἐπιστ. forms together but one idea. Ἡ ἐπιστ. is the present Second Epistle, as in 1Th_5:21 it is the First. Hence: If any one obey not our word announced to him by the reading of this Epistle (especially 2Th_3:10; 2Th_3:12); or (Lünemann): my command renewed by means of this Epistle; that man σημειοῦσθε. This word in the middle signifies, to note for one’s self; it is used of physicians who mark the symptoms of disease; also of grammarians who make remarks: σεμείωσαι, note this. Hence: Note him for yourselves, mark him down, as one to be avoided. Bengel compares the synonymous παραδειγματίζειν; Chrysostom adds as a statement of the object: that he may not remain hidden. The meaning is not simply: “Make him known by all withdrawing from him;” but: “Point him out by an agreement in the church, in order that this may be done.” The sense is essentially the same, whether we read καὶ μὴ συναναμίγνυσθε, or μὴ συναναμίγνυσθαι (the latter reading is perhaps to be explained by the influence of 1Co_5:9; 1Co_5:11). The passage runs more correctly, if we read: Mark him for yourselves in order μὴ συναναμίγνυσθαι, &c., καὶ μὴ ὡς ἐχθρὸν ἡγεῖσθε, without αὐτόν, because here likewise belongs still the previous τοῦτον; whereas the omission is not so natural, if a separate imperative with the dative has intervened. Still this is far from being conclusive. With the other reading the inaccuracy is not greater than perhaps at 2Th_3:12.43 The Apostle’s command is, not to mix themselves up, that is, to have no dealings, with such a one, to cultivate no fraternal intercourse with him. It is essentially the same as had already been enjoined in 2Th_3:6, στέλλεσθαι ὑμᾶς ἀπό, &c.; except only that what was there indicated as the act of individuals appears in this instance to be a general proceeding of the great majority; if nearly all did so, and that by agreement, it was no longer an act merely of individual members, but of the church. The design of it was: that he may be shamed; Ewald: that he may repent and reform. The active is found at 1Co_4:14; here we have the passive (not middle), as in Tit_2:8; the middle with τινά (in classical Greek, πινός) signifies, to regard one, fear him (Luk_18:2). The passive, on the other hand, will mean: that he may be brought to the point of turning in upon himself; that he may be led by disapprobation to a knowledge of himself.—And count him not as an enemy; that is to say, as an enemy of God and the church; ὡς might be dispensed with; it makes more strongly prominent the subjective side of the conception [Ellicott: “ὡς being used (here almost pleonastically …) to mark the aspect in which he was not to be regarded.”—J. L.], and is indeed a Hebraism, comp. חָשַׁב כְּ, Sept. ἡγ. ὥσπερ (Job_19:11). The connection with what precedes is made by καί, not δέ. No doubt, καί like the Hebrew וְ frequently serves for a connection that is loose in form, while yet really marking opposition. But here it is still more simple to understand Paul as having in his eye as the main exhortation what follows ὰλλά, and as merely in the first instance removing with μὴ ὡς, &c. what might stand in the way of wholesome admonition. [Ellicott: “καί …, with its usual and proper force, subjoins to the previous exhortation a further one that was fully compatible with it, and in fact tended to show the real principle on which the command was given: it was not punitive, but corrective.” Revision: “That the moral result aimed at (ἵνα ἐντραπῇ) may not be hindered, this, of course, must be the spirit and style of your discipline: count him not,” &c.—J. L.] Accordingly: Admonish him as a brother; comp. 1Th_5:12; properly: set his mind right. Theophylact: νουδετεῖν is not ὀνειδίζειν. The Apostle immediately repeats his warning against an excess of human severity. Due admonition belongs to brotherly love (Lev_19:17). Inconceivably capricious is the assertion of Hilgenfeld (p. 262), that disorderly idlers did not attain to this superior importance until the rise of Christian heresy, or that the later writer endows mere idlers with the features of error in Christian doctrine. But in truth there is not in the text a single hint of this sort. For it would be a groundless and arbitrary abuse of 2Th_2:4; 2Th_2:7, to regard it as a proof of the heretical character of the ἀτάκτως περιπατοῦντες. Thus too we lose the instructive fact, that Paul already expresses himself with wholesome rigor against things, which we perhaps judge too loosely.

7. (2Th_3:16.) But may the Lord, &c.—This closing prayer is the fourth solemn desire in this short Epistle; Paul is full of prayer and supplication. The turn of the phrase is the same as in 1Th_3:11; 1Th_5:23; 2Th_2:16. In opposition to your doing, the Lord Himself must show you and impart to you what is right. In 1Th_5:23 the word is: ὁ θεὸς τῆς εἰρ.; but here: the Lord of peace; and that is not the Father, as Wetstein thinks, and Hilgenfeld, who sees therein a trace of spuriousness! but Christ, who has this peace, and authority to dispense it, the Prince of peace (Isa_9:5 [6]; Joh_14:21; Joh_20:19 sqq.) Why should it not have been just as possible for Paul to call Him so, as κύριος τῆς δόξης (1Co_2:8)?—Give you peace; that is something greater than merely agreement amongst yourselves, though the taming of the refractory (Calvin) is included in it. But, in particular, the article shows that we are here to understand peace in the whole compass of its meaning—everything pertaining to it—above all, peace with God, inviolate life and salvation, and the full, joyful sense of that; finally, a peace that overspreads the entire world. Lünemann remarks, as Theodoret before him, that to wish one peace at the conclusion of letters is the Christian modification of ἔῤῥωσθε.—May He give you this always (so διὰ παντός is to be understood likewise at Rom_11:10) in every way; comp. Php_1:18, παντὶ τρόπῳ without ἐν; the import of the last phrase is: in every sense, and therefore to a larger extent than simply in the last-mentioned relations; this thought is given with specifications in 1Th_5:23. He concludes in the briefest style with the benediction: The Lord be with you all; therefore also with the erring.

DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL

1. (2Th_3:7-9.) On the manual labor of the Apostle, see at 1Th_2:9, the Doctrinal and Ethical Note 6. There the question is primarily about obviating suspicion, as if he sought his own profit; here he completes what was there said with the positive consideration, that his aim in that matter had also been to train them by his example to Christian diligence. In the preacher everything preaches, says Harms; and many things are better taught by example than by word. Paul clearly recognizes the right of preachers of the gospel to be paid; but in his Gentile mission he ordinarily waived it, that he might be burdensome to no one, keep no one by it from the gospel, avoid even the appearance of selfishness (I seek not yours, but you, 2Co_12:14), and make the gospel without charge (1Co_9:18; 2Co_11:1), so that it should appear as really a gift of free grace. It is still in our day a surprise to the heathen, when missionaries do not like merchants seek for gain amongst them. The Apostle thus continued free from a dependence injurious to the gospel, kept under his body (1Co_9:27), and gave the churches an example of industry in union with godliness. His conduct formed a very marked contrast to the proud Roman contempt for manual labor, and is also a rare instance of a Divinely refreshed elasticity of spirit. It is a great thing so to walk, that the appeal can be made to the glory of God: Imitate us. It is important that the pastor and his house should in all respects preach also to the eye, and should feel a joy in setting an example. This requires a self discipline, before which arrogance disappears. The last and highest point no doubt is: “Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ” (1Co_11:1).

2. (2Th_3:10-13.) Here the Apostle states the principles of a sound Christian support of the poor (comp. on 1Th_4:10-12, Doctrinal and Ethical Notes 4–6). The rule in 2Th_3:10 goes back to the primary command in Gen_3:19, that curse which yet is equally a blessing (Psa_128:2), and which is not to be nastily set aside under a pretence of spirituality, but in fact through fleshly indulgence and sloth. An excitement that does not go deep easily brings with it such disdain of outward activity, that a person fancies himself raised in heavenly rapture above labor, almost as if it were dishonorable. Here, then, the test is very soberly applied: Art thou raised also above eating? like the angels (Bengel)? In the Old Testament, especially the Proverbs (comp. also Psa_37:21), industry is more largely spoken of; in the New Testament the heavenly calling preponderates, but this, wherever it is necessary, with a very plain and sober protest against misapprehension and abuse. The gospel Cannot be degraded into a mere hod-carrier for civil uses, but no less does it repel all such noxious perversity as would bring 1. an unmerited reproach on Divine truth, and 2. damage to the heart of the erring themselves, a sore recovery from a brief debauch. God, it is true, cares for the birds and the lilies, but for them according to the nature of birds and lilies, and for men, in the way that is good for men. In our text the sharpest discipline is appointed for idleness, even of the refined, seemingly pious sort: it is to reap its natural fruit, namely, want and hunger. So then, you are to work; not all with your hands; head-work also is work. Even those who give should observe the principle of 2Th_3:10, and not by an improper bestowal of charity out of their own or the public means injure the recipient, and confirm him in his sin. Alms is ἐλεημοσύνη); but it is an evil tenderness, to foster an immoral mendicity. What a repudiation is there in our passage of the mendicant orders, who made their τάξις to consist in living ἀτάκτως! Bengel inquires: What would Paul have said to such vows? not to mention that such beggars affect to be the greatest saints. The dignity of the individual, and inevitably also his religious independence, are depressed and enslaved by the enjoyment of alms received in indolence. A different thing is innocent poverty; as a Divine humiliation, it may exert a salutary influence. Stockmeyer: The Apostle does not say that whoever does not work shall not eat. That were harsh and unmerciful. For many a man does not work, who yet should eat; the old, who have passed their life in labor, and whose strength for labor has thus been exhausted, these have an honorable place reserved for them at the table of the prosperous; those in like manner, who through bodily or mental infirmity are incapacitated for work, have a free seat at the table of love; and, lastly, such as would fain labor, but just at present they find no work; they themselves beg: “Give us not bread, give us work; we desire to eat our own bread;” to them work should be given, but, until that is found, they should not be left to perish. Only to those who will not work does the Apostle’s injunction apply. There is no reason to fear that any one will thus die of hunger. Before it comes to that, hunger will drive to labor, and for the idler that is the greatest kindness, indeed his salvation. To give blindly, wherever we are applied to, is frequently to do, not a favor, but an injury. It is true, however, that little is done by merely turning away from the idler, and regarding him as an enemy of society. He is still a brother, though an erring one, who deserves to be shamed and censured in earnest (2Th_3:15), and, if we are not yet at liberty to open to him the liberal hand, we are not to refuse him the hand of brotherly compassion, that seeks to lead him in the right way.—Amongst those who are suffered to eat, without having to work, children also are to be numbered; not, however, the rich. Stockmeyer explains how the blessing of a quiet, orderly condition becomes ours only through faithful, unassuming labor. Many persons, indeed, are so burdened with work, that we might well desire for them more leisure for the tranquil culture of the inner man. Still, less depends on freedom in that respect, than on the right direction of the heart. And when labor itself exerts a whole some influence on the soul of man, it leads it from dissipation into a state of collectedness, from caprice to orderliness, from bustle to calmness, so that indeed during labor it finds time for self-introspection, and for sanctifying and strengthening itself in looking upwards to God. Idleness, on the other hand, has precisely the opposite effect. Though the body enjoys a lazy quiet, the spirit roves the more restlessly to and fro, and becomes the prey of the most unregulated thoughts and desires. And then there is work of the most various kinds, from the cultivation of the soil into fruitful fields, on through all the relations of life, to the culture of man’s spirit and heart itself. In this task every one should be interested, every one on his part by orderly activity contributing to the good of the whole. Those, therefore, to whose lot wealth has fallen, without their having needed to earn it, have before men a certain right to eat their bread even without labor; but not before God, if they would be His good stewards, nor yet before themselves, if they desire their own profit. This must be urgently impressed on their heart: Find work for yourselves along with your bread; if you have no need to work for yourselves, work for others, work for the general good; only then will the blessing rest on your bread.—Amidst the many disappointments which one experiences in intercourse with the indigent, it may become a difficult thing for the naturally selfish heart to preserve its love. It must be made a matter of earnest study, to be evermore a cheerful giver. But on the whole (Stockmeyer) there is so much to make us weary in well-doing. Sometimes it seems to us that the work required of us is really too much; sometimes it seems to be as it were in vain, and crowned with no result; sometimes even, instead of encouragement, we meet with nothing but misconception and ingratitude. But how is it that the Apostle can forbid us to become weary? We become so without wishing to do so. Yes, but one may wish to get the better of his weariness, and in this we are aided by the fountain of refreshment and strength, to which we are pointed in that reference to the love of God which appoints unto us an eternal Sabbath, and to the patience of Christ, who had to experience still greater ingratitude, and seemed to labor with even less result, than we (2Th_3:5).

3. (2Th_3:6; 2Th_3:11; 2Th_3:14-15.) The injunction here given by the Apostle is, after the extraordinary judgment on Ananias and Sapphira, and the penal sentence on Simon the sorcerer, the first example of Church discipline. It is the more worthy of notice on account of the Apostle’s subjecting to it an error, which we probably should not have regarded so seriously. With a keen spiritual insight he practises the principiis obsta, as in 1Co_11:3 sqq.; where he resists with such marked emphasis the first stirrings of a Women’s Emancipation. On Church discipline comp. Godet’s Report in the Swiss Reformed Preachers’ Association at Neuenburg, 1850, and Fabri on Kirchenzucht im Sinn und Geist des Evangdiums, Stuttgard, 1854. Both agree in proving Church discipline of a genuine and thoroughly evangelical kind to be an act of severity proceeding from love, and in recognizing in the historical development of excommunication a very unevangelical penalty, and one rather befitting the police. Both incline somewhat too much towards reducing all Church discipline to a cure of souls. The ground-text from which they properly start is Mat_18:15 sqq. As we are to give no offence to our neighbors (Mat_3:6 sqq.), so just as little are we to sin against them by neglecting to admonish them. It is a brother who is liable to censure. If he will be a Christian, and still persists in a sin that is inconsistent with his Christian profession, he should be convicted of this contradiction, first privately, and, if that does not avail, then by taking with us one or two witnesses. Neither in the case of the first complainant, nor of these further witnesses, is there any assertion of the need of an official character. Only they must be Christians, whose hearts are affected by the injury done to the Christtian calling. If again he hear not the two or three, then tell it to the Church,—her, namely, whose establishment and invincibleness were spoken of in Mat_16:18. And if he hear not the Church also, let him be to thee as a heathen and a publican. In the earlier stages a protest was made from his confession against his sin, but now it is from his sin, since he will not forsake it, against his confession. Let him be to thee as a heathen, that is, to thee, the first complainant; nor is this to be at once generalized. But certainly there is now further connected herewith a promise given by the Lord to His disciples, that whatever they bind or loose on earth shall be ratified likewise in heaven. They have made God’s cause theirs; God now makes their cause His; and, if they have no other weapons than the prayers of two or three gathered together in the name of Jesus, He will hear their prayers, and will cause the binding and loosing to act with power.

In 1 Corinthians 5. we meet with a case, in which Paul reproaches the church for not having taken measures against a peculiarly grievous scandal. There too he by no means makes the office bearers especially responsible. There too the man, whom discipline should have reached, is one who desires to pass for a brother, and nevertheless holds fast stubbornly to his sin (2Th_3:11). In that instance Paul omits the first and second exhortations, because in a notoriously bad case these were no longer admissible. But he insists that the church, to be free from participation in the guilt, should have broken off all intercourse with the impenitent sinner (2Th_3:9; 2Th_3:11); and he further declares, by virtue of his apostolic authority, yet in such a way that it appears to be the rule which the Corinthians should have executed, that he delivers that wicked person unto Satan; he does not mean, to damnation, but, if possible, for salvation, namely, for the destruction of the flesh, to a bodily disease, or some such trial, that the spirit may be saved (2Th_3:5; comp. 1Ti_1:20 [1Co_11:30]). The suspension of intercourse answers to the word, let him be to thee as a heathen and a publican; the delivery to Satan, on the other hand, is a special mode of binding, and is effected through the prayer of faith, invoking, when necessary, a terrible punishment as a means of salutary discipline. This, of course, can be imitated in a very evil and fleshly style; but however often fanatical priests may have practised such an abuse, this does not annul the legitimate use, that keeps within the limits of the word and spirit of Scripture. Men are required, who really have the Spirit (Joh_20:22-23), or who pray sincerely in the name of Jesus (Mat_18:19-20); only such can practise especially this extreme measure. And then it is just as important, not to neglect a timely restoration; as the Apostle sets us the example, when he will not allow that the unhappy man be swallowed up with overmuch sorrow, and so destroyed by Satan (2Co_2:7; 2Co_2:11).

In Thessalonica the question was not about anything so unusually wicked, as there in Corinth. For this reason, there is as yet in the meanwhile no mention of a delivery to Satan, but simply of the rupture of brotherly intimacy. As Bengel says, the affair was a labes quæ non nisi lautas animas tentat. And therefore the offenders here are not to be regarded as publicans and heathens, but as brethren who must be admonished, and who accordingly must even be told what there is against them. They must be dealt with as diseased, not as amputated, members.

It has been asked whether in the suspension of brotherly intercourse, which according to 1Co_5:11 was a refusal to eat together, carried with it an exclusion from the Holy Supper. Godet will not admit of the inference, that, if not even ordinary fellowship at table was granted to him, then much less was the Supper; this he thinks not at all self-evident, the first being a matter of personal allowance, the second not so. But the distinction is perhaps too nice, and for the apostolic age especially untenable. A publican or a heathen might be present at the preaching of the word, but he had no part in the fraternal repast. The shrine of the covenant was for no one who was delivered unto Satan. Nor indeed was the Supper at that time observed as a separate act of worship; it formed the conclusion of the love-feast or agape, and the two together were called δεῖπνον κυριακόν. If the one half of this was refused, then, of course, so was the other. On this point, therefore, Fabri also does not agree with Godet. What most readily admits still of a doubt in our passage is, how far the discipline reached, since it is here said expressly: not as an enemy, but as a brother admonish him. At any rate, however, the apostolic writings do not anticipate an insolent demand for the Supper on the part of those under censure, but repentance unto life.

Then as to the manner in which the church declares itself, that is not, it is true, clearly defined. When Jesus says: Should he not hear the church, the church must have found some way of expressing its mind. The mode is left undetermined; but our passage shows that, as soon as the church as a whole, or by a large majority, obeyed the word of the Apostle, the στέλλεσθαι, an individual affair in the first instance, came to be a σημειοῦσθαι on the part of the church. Because nowadays we do not generally have churches, that could in this way harmoniously express themselves in the Spirit of the Lord, we are not at liberty to deny the existence of such a state of things even in the apostolic age. At present there may be no possibility of anything much beyond the private care of souls; but this does not prove that church discipline is essentially nothing but the private care of souls. Nor is the design of it by any means solely the reformation of the offender. When the Basle Confession says: es bannet die christenliche Kylch nit dann umb Besserung willen [the Christian Church does not excommunicate for the sake of amendment], it also supplements this onesidedness by exhibiting the other object: damil die Kilch jr Gestalt sovil möglich on Masen (ohne Flecken) behalte [that the Church may preserve its aspect as free from blemishes as possible). In other words, the restoration of the erring person is certainly the first thing aimed at by the genuine earnestness of love; but whether he repents or not, it is just as important to save the church from a spreading scandal, and the church conscience from moral stupefaction; and not less so, finally, is the removal of any such stain as would imperil the outward missionary calling of the church (1Co_5:1; 1Co_10:32). Discipline, therefore, contemplates something beyond the mere influence on individuals. It is, as Nitzsch says, a judicial act. So it is understood likewise in the Articles of Schmalkald, III. 9, where the lesser excommunication is very briefly spoken of, for the purpose, chiefly, of pressing the distinction between it and civil penalties; and just so in the Heidelberg Catechism, Quest. 85.

How is it with us to-day? By a manifold unchristian banning and cursing; by an admixture of civil penalties, of such, in particular, as by disgracing exasperated; and by a wicked distinction of classes, there has so much damage been done to the practice of ecclesiastical discipline, that a zealous rigorism, which would reëstablish the old methods, has here the least possible prospect of any result whatever. But, while in our circumstances the setting aside of an unevangelical Church police merits the highest approval, it is not so with the widespread relaxation of all discipline, and the resentment of many against whatever looks like it. When an officer of Berne was required to see that his soldiers, after a night riotously passed in drinking and whoring, were on the next morning without any rebuke whatever ordered to the Holy Supper, it is conceivable that the wounded conscience might be driven even to separation. And yet it is not said that this expedient was the right one. But a private proceeding, which without arrogance testifies an unwillingness to be made a partaker of another’s guilt through intercourse with the sinner, as if we favored his sin (2Jn_1:10-11), that is the duty incumbent first of all on the individual. It will be blessed, the more one is willing to suffer for the truth. The στέλλεσθαι, performed by one or a few, when many are not yet ripe for it, is an act of fidelity to the apostolic word; and a prayer of two or three has in this case a special promise from the Lord. Roos: The directions are left still standing in the Bible, if peradventure it may be possible for small societies here and there to make use of them; and we wait for better times, when their use will be more complete and general.

4. (2Th_3:16.) Roos: When animosity was mingled with exhortation, or self-willed people despised it, it might produce discord. Paul therefore wishes for them peace in the heart, in the family, and the church; peace with the Lord, with their stumbling brethren, and also, so far as possible, with those without.—Not by covering up what is evil, but by overcoming it, is true peace to be obtained. The sin that troubles it must be extinguished. But that we should have to contend with our neighbors should not cease, however necessary it may be, to be painful to us. Peace must ever be our aim. A cheerful warfare in the spirit of peace only the Lord of peace can give.

HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL

2Th_3:6 sqq. in connection with 2Th_3:5. Roos: A directing of the heart into the love of God is necessary, when we are to denounce something that is opposed to the glory of God, and abolish it in ourselves or others; and a directing of the heart into the patience of Christ is necessary, if, according to the injunction in 2Th_3:15, zeal is not to be carried too far.

2Th_3:6. Disorder may arise in the best churches.—Berl. Bib.: To command in the name of Jesus Christ requires the humility and long-suffering of Jesus.

Calvin: Those live disorderly, who reflect not on the end of their creation; those orderly, who walk according to the commandments of God.—Roos: These people were not idle, but they did not attend to their own business, but meddled with the affairs of others, and so did not maintain the necessary quietness. Their work, accordingly, was no work, but a restless occupation that was troublesome to others. They ran around (Diedrich) in restlessness, excitement, inaction, and eccentricity.—Calvin calls such sponging drones.—Heubner: If one found no companions, that of itself must be an end of his enjoyment.

2Th_3:7-9. Calvin: Our teaching has much more weight, when we lay no burden on others but what we bear ourselves.—Chrysostom: Talking is easy for every one; the difficulty is in acting, when there is need for it.—Heubner: A position of high consideration often misleads into taking undue liberties.—Diedrich: (The Apostle acted thus) that they might see, that a Christian should work and earn his own bread.—Mental labor is by many not reckoned to be really labor.—Calvin: All men are not so reasonable, as to acknowledge what is due to a minister of the word; many grudge them their living, as if they were idlers.—Paul insists on the right, but shows them (Diedrich) that he would rather do double work, than accept of a gratuitous support.—Heubner: The common maxim is: I do not put myself to inconvenience for the sake of others.—The same: True freedom restricts itself.

2Th_3:10. Heubner: Every morsel admonishes: Dost thou deserve to taste?

2Th_3:11-12. Περιεργάζεσθαι is in French: faire des riens.—Diedrich: Such fanatical, labor-shirking folks fancy that they are beyond all others zealous, pious, and holy. At such fanaticism weak people are accustomed readily to stare.—Stähelin: It is sinful indolence, when one does not Christianly labor in an honorable calling. But that calling is honorable, which in itself is not displeasing to God, nor scandalous to our neighbor, but in which we are led by God to stand, and to which we are permitted to ask His assistance. Idleness and Christianity do not agree. The more pious the Christian, the more diligent the worker.—Starke: He who without necessity eats other people’s bread is no better than a thief.—Diedrich: Our glory and our heavenly treasure we have within; we can therefore perform all outward labor, and should do so willingly, that we may serve our time by what is temporal. They who belong to the eternal Lord should not beg or steal what is temporal. Thus (in such a seemingly lowly way) will God perfect us for the highest glory.

[Scott: A slothful man is a scandal to any society, but most to a religious society.—Lectures: What a practical, reasonable, orderly thing Christianity is! It would have every man at work—at work of some kind—and every man at his own work.—The same: And cat their own bread! How often has that one noble phrase quickened the pulse, and nerved the arm, of honest industry! It has done more for the, poor of Christendom, in Protestant countries at least, than all the devices of philanthropy and all the provisions of law.—J. L.]

2Th_3:13. Zwingli: Many call those good works, which are not at all good. Nothing is good, but what comes from God.—Diedrich: Become not weary in this good way of a sober, discreet walk.—Roos: (Paul’s wish is that) they should not drive this precept (2Th_3:10-12) too far, and, if those brethren should perhaps be unable fully to earn their own bread, they are not to be reluctant to help them.—Chrysostom: It is not the giving, but the misconduct of the beggar, that should cause us pain.—Berl. Bib.: Fret not thyself because of evil-doers (Psa_37:1; Psa_37:8).—Rieger: The Apostle had frequent occasion to warn against despondency (2Co_4:1; 2Co_4:16; Gal_6:9; Eph_3:13).

2Th_3:14-15. Apostolic Church discipline presupposes genuine churches, wherein the rule of God’s word is recognized, and those who have the Spirit decide. Chrysostom already bewails the decay of discipline.—Roos: Paul demands obedience, and hints at still greater severity. He writes at one time mildly, at another sharply, according to the exigencies of persons and cases as they occurred. He desires to draw the upright Thessalonians also into fellowship in his zeal.—Church discipline should not merely exclude gross scorners, but should also hold members living in the dissipation of inactivity to quietness and work.—Roos: Penitent shame makes all right again.—It looks well, when the few disorderly persons blush at being put to shame by the reserve of others.—Rieger: Many a man in his self-love and fond fancy supposes that he hits it far better than others; but by the withdrawal of confidence and intercourse he must be made to feel, that he has reason to be ashamed.—Calvin: Not flattery, but exhortation, is the true sign of love.—Roos: Matters stand ill in a Christian church, when we are not able and willing to shame disorderly persons by withdrawing from them, and treating them with reserve. In such a case love has not salt enough.—In how many places is the mass composed of the listless or the malevolent!—Roos: Who will make them blush, when they are defiant, and not ashamed of wickedness?

2Th_3:16. Rieger: We need peace in the Church, in the commonwealth, in households, marriages, families, trades, in regard to eating one’s own bread, in regard to opinions, wherein one is often puffed up against another. But (Von Gerlach): Peace, not at the cost of the holy war against impurities, but just by means of such a conflict.

2Th_3:6-16. Stockmeyer: The word of God would especially take under its discipline and care our inner man, and implant in us a heavenly mind, but not as if earthly relations were something altogether indifferent, or even something so low, that the Christian is not at all to meddle with them. Rather, the heavenly mind is to show itself in those very things (Luk_16:10).

Footnotes:

[20]2Th_3:6.—[δέ. Revision: “So far is it from being true, however, that the love of God and the patience of Christ are incompatible with the maintenance of a proper discipline, &c.” Ordinarily, indeed, this δέ is regarded as merely μεταβατικόν. Webster and Wilkinson think it refers to ἅ παραγγ. in 2Th_3:4=Now the command I have to give you is.—J. L.]

[21]2Th_3:6.—Only B. D.1 E.1 omit ἡμῶν; the great majority of authorities have it; also. Sin. [It is bracketed by Lachmann, and cancelled by Tischendorf, Alford, Ellicott.—J. L.]

[22]2Th_3:6.—[κατὰ τὴν παράδοσιν. See 2Th_2:9, Critical Note 22, and 2Th_2:15, Critical Note 7.—J. L.]

[23]2Th_3:6.—The third person plural, if not genuine, would least of all have come by correction presenting as it does a slight inaccuracy of style;—παντός points to a plurality, and so the sequel treats of the ἀτάκτοις in the plural. The Recepta παρέλαβε has scarcely any support at all; παρελάβετε [Lachmann] is given, indeed, by B. F. G., but obviously as a correction; we have therefore to read either παέλαβον (with Sin.2 D. E. K. L., &c. [approved by Mill, and edited by Bengel, Knapp, Scholz, Schott.—J. L.]), or still better παρελάβοσαν (with Sin.1 A. D.1 [Griesbach, Tischendorf, Alford, Wordsworth, Ellicott, &c.—J. L.]), the rarer (Alexandrian) form; see Winer, § 13. 2; Rom_3:13; and the Septuagint often.

[24]2Th_3:7.—[μιμεῖσθαι: comp. 1Th_1:6.—J. L.]

[25]2Th_3:8.—[ἀλλ’ ἐν (Sin.: ἀλλὰ ἐν κόπῳ καἱ μόχθῳ, νύκτα καὶ ἡμέραν ἐργαζόμενοι. See foot-note to p. 162.—Lachmann reads νυκτὸς καὶ ἡμέρας, after Sin. B. F. G.—J. L.]

[26]2Th_3:8.—[As in 1Th_2:9.—J. L.]

[27]2Th_3:9.—[ἐξουσίαν. This word is rendered authority 29 times in our Common Version, and so here in nearly all the older, and in many modern, English Versions. Others have right.—J. L.]

[28]2Th_3:9.—[ἵνα ἐαυτοὺς τύπον (see 1Th_1:7, Critical Note 7) δῶμεν ὑμῖν εἰς τὸ μιμεῖσθαι ἡμᾶς.—J. L.]

[29]2Th_3:10.—[καὶ γάρ. Revision: “And you cannot well doubt that such was our design. For not only by our example did we inculcate this rule, but also by express precept.” Ellicott makes this γάρ “coördinate with the preceding γάρ in 2Th_3:7” (so Lünemann), and finds here a “second confirmation of the wisdom and pertinence of the preceding warning that they ought to avoid those that were walking disorderly.”—The τοῦτο before παρμγγέλλομεν is wanting in Sin.1, but supplied, by correction.—J. L.]

[30]2Th_3:12.—The reading, ἐν κυρ. Ἰησ. Χρ. has the oldest authorities in its favor, A. B. Sin.1 D.1 E.1 F. G., Versions [Lachmann, Tischendorf, Alford, Ellicott, Riggenbach]; the other, διὰ τοῦ κυρ. ἡμῶν Ἰ. Χ. [Sin.2 D.3 E.2 K. L.], is moreover the more usual with παρακαλεῖν.

[31]2Th_3:13.—[For ἐκκακήσητε, Schott, Lachmann, Tischendorf, Alford, Wordsworth, Ellicott, read ἐγ (Sin.) or ἐνκακήσητε.—J. L.]

[32]2Th_3:14.—[τῆς ἐπιστολῆς; Revision: ‘ ‘which I have just written, and which he will soon hear read.” Ellicott, however: “This, perhaps, may remain as one of the few cases in which idiom and euphony may justify us in retaining the pronominal translation;” as does likewise Alford.—J. L.]

[33]2Th_3:14.—The καί is wanting in A. B. Sin. D.2 E. [Lachmann], and with this is connected the fact, that nearly the same authorities give the infinitive συναναμίγνυσθαι, [Lachmann]; many codd., to be sure, are constantly confounding as and e, as the Sin. also just before gives σημειοῦσθαι; see the exposition. [Riggenbach brackets καί.—J. L.]

[34]2Th_3:14.—[See 1Co_4:14; and so Ellicott here.—J. L.]

[35]2Th_3:15.—[καί. See the exposition.—J. L.]

[36] 2Th_3:16.—[ἐν παντὶ τρόπῳ. Comp. 2Th_2:3.—J. L.] The only suitable reading τρόπῳ is sufficiently supported by A.2 B. Sin. D.3 E. K. L., Versions and Fathers; τόπῳ (A.1 D.1 F. G. [Vulgate]) arose probably from such places as 1Co_1:2, and was improperly favored by Beza and Grotius. [Lachmann alone edits it.—J. L.]

The other various readings—2Th_3:8, νυκτὸς καὶ ἡμέρας, instead of νύκτα καὶ ἡμέραν; 2Th_3:11, a different position of the word περιπατοῦντας; 2Th_3:13, ἐνκακήσητε, instead of ἐκκ.—are of no consequence whatever to the sense.

[37][So Matthias and Olshausen explain ὑ π έστελλεν, whereas Ellicott agrees with De Wette in regarding that rather as the initial act, which led to the second—the separation.—J. L.]

[38][Ellicott: “in that we behaved not disorderly.—J. L.]

[39][παρά τινος. Webster and Wilkinson quote the provincial English idiom: off any man.—J. L.]

[40] Riggenbach’s construction is the more common; but the other, which makes ἐν κόπῳ καὶ μόχθῳ the positive complement, in opposition to δωρεάν, of αρτον ἐφάγομεν, and then adds νύκτα καὶ ἡμέραν ἐργαζόμενοι as an explanatory parallel” (Revision), is adopted by the Dutch Version, De Wette, Winer, Conybeare, Ellicott, Am. Bible Union, and others. Ellicott: “The emphatic position of δωρεάν apparently suggests the sharper antithesis, which the separation of the members here seems to introduce.”—J. L.]

[41][Estius: “Quasi dicas, nihil operantes, sed circumoperantes.” Robinson: “Doing nothing, but over-doing; not busy in work, but busy-bodies.” Conybeare: “Busy bodies who do no business;” Jowett: “busy only with what is not their own business;” “Webster and Wilkinson: “working nothing but overworking.”—J. L.]

[42][Ellicott, on Gal_6:9 : “If ὲκκακ. exist, the difference will be very slight; ἐκκακεῖν may perhaps mean, ‘to retire from fear out of any course of action’ (nearly ἀποκακεῖν); ἐγκακεῖν ‘to behave cowardly,’ ‘to lose heart,’ when in it.—J. L.]

[43][The two cases are by no means parallel, and in neither case can the construction properly be called inaccurate.—J. L.]

Lange's Commentary on the Holy Scriptures (Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical), ed. John Peter Lange, English translation edited by Philip Schaff (1864–1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Chapter 23

THE CHRISTIAN WORTH OF LABOUR

2Th_3:6-15 (R.V.)

THIS passage is very similar in contents to one in the fourth chapter of the First Epistle. The difference between the two is in tone; the Apostle writes with much greater severity on this than on the earlier occasion. Entreaty is displaced by command; considerations of propriety, the appeal to the good name of the church, by the appeal to the authority of Christ; and good counsel by express directions for Christian discipline. Plainly the moral situation, which had caused him anxiety some months before, had become worse rather than better. What, then, was the situation to which he here addresses himself so seriously? It was marked by two bad qualities-a disorderly walk, and idleness.

"We hear," he writes, "of some that walk among you disorderly." The metaphor in the word is a military one; the underlying idea is that every man has a post in life or in the Church, and that he ought to be found, not away from his post, but at it. A man without a post is a moral anomaly. Everyone of us is part of a whole, a member of an organic body, with functions to discharge which can be discharged by no other, and must therefore bee steadily discharged by himself. To walk disorderly means to forget this, and to act as if we were independent; now at this, now at that, according to our discretion or our whim; not rendering the community a constant service, in a place of our own-a service which is valuable, largely because it can be counted on. Everyone knows the extreme unsatisfactoriness of those men who never can keep a place when they get it. Their friends plague themselves to find new openings for them; but without any gross offence, such as drunkenness or dishonesty, they persistently fall out of them; there is something about them which seems to render them incapable of sticking to their post. It is an unfortunate constitution, perhaps; but it is a grave moral fault as well. Such men settle to nothing, and therefore they render no permanent service to others; whatever they might be worth otherwise, they are worth nothing in any general estimate, simply because they cannot be, depended upon. What is more, they are worth nothing to themselves; they never accumulate moral, any more than material, capital; they have no reserve in them of fidelity, sobriety, discipline. They are to be pitied, indeed, as all sinners are to be pitied; but they are also to be commanded, in the name of the Lord Jesus, to lay their minds to their work, and to remember that steadfastness in duty is an elementary requirement of the gospel. Among the Thessalonians it was religious excitement that unsettled men, and made them abandon the routine of duty; but whatever be the cause, the evil results are the same. And, on the other hand, when we are loyal, constant, regularly at our post, however humble it be, we render a real service to others, and grow in strength of character ourselves. It is the beginning of all discipline and of all goodness to have fixed relations and fixed duties, and a fixed determination to be faithful to them.

Besides this disorderly walk, with its moral instability, Paul heard of some who worked not at all. In other words, idleness was spreading in the church. It went to a great and shameless length. Christian men apparently thought nothing of sacrificing their independence, and eating bread for which they had not wrought. Such a state of affairs was peculiarly offensive at Thessalonica, where the Apostle had been careful to set so different an example. If any one could have been excused for declining to labour, on the ground that he was preoccupied with religious hopes and interests, it was he. His apostolic ministry was a charge which made great demands upon his strength; it used up the time and energy which he might otherwise have given to his trade: he might well have urged that other work was a physical impossibility. More than this, the Lord had ordained that they who preached the gospel should live by the gospel; and on that ground alone he was entitled to claim maintenance from those to whom he preached. But though he was always careful to safeguard this right of the Christian ministry, he was as careful, as a rule, to refrain from exercising it; and in Thessalonica, rather than prove a burden to the church, he had wrought and toiled, night and day, with his own hands. All this was an example for the Thessalonians to imitate; and we can understand the severity with which the Apostle treats that idleness which alleges in its defence the strength of its interest in religion. It was a personal insult.

Over against this shallow pretence Paul sets the Christian, virtue of industry, with its stern law, "If any man will not work, neither let him eat." If he claims to lead a superhuman angelic life, let him subsist on angels food. What we find in this passage is not the exaggeration which is sometimes called the gospel of work; but the soberer and truer thought that work is essential, in general, to the Christian character. The Apostle plays with the words when he writes, "That work not at all, but are busybodies"; or, as it has been reproduced in English, who are busy only with what is not their business. This is, in point of fact, the moral danger of idleness, in those who are not otherwise vicious. Where men are naturally bad, it multiplies temptations and opportunities for sin; Satan finds some mischief still for idle hands to do. But even where it is the good who are concerned, as in the passage before us, idleness has its perils. The busybody is a real character-a man or a woman who, having no steady work to do, which must be done whether it is liked or disliked, and which is therefore wholesome, is too apt to meddle in other peoples affairs, religious or worldly; and to meddle, too, without thinking that it is meddling; an impertinence; perhaps a piece of downright, stone-blind Pharisaism: A person who is not disciplined and made wise by regular work has no idea of its moral worth and opportunities; nor has he, as a rule, any idea of the moral worthlessness and vanity of such an existence as his own.

There seem to have been a good many fussy people in Thessalonica, anxious about their industrious neighbours, concerned for their lack of interest in the Lords coming, perpetually meddling with them-and living upon them. It is no wonder that the Apostle expresses himself with some peremptoriness: "If any man will not work, neither let him eat." The difficulty about the application of this rule is that it has no application except to the poor. In a society like our own, the busybody may be found among those for whom this law has no terror; they are idle, simply because they have an income which is independent of labour. Yet what the Apostle says has a lesson for such people also. One of the dangers of their situation is that they should underestimate the moral and spiritual worth of industry. A retired merchant, a military or naval officer on half pay, a lady with money in the funds and no responsibilities but her own-all these have a deal of time on their hands; and if they are good people, it is one of the temptations incident to their situation, that they should have what the Apostle calls a busybodys interest in others. It need not be a spurious or an affected interest; but it misjudges the moral condition of others, and especially of the labouring classes, because it does not appreciate the moral content of a day full of work. If the work is done honestly at all, it is a thing of great price; there are virtues embedded in it, patience, courage, endurance, fidelity, which contribute as much to the true good of the world and the true enrichment of personal character as the pious solicitude of those who have nothing to do but be pious. Perhaps these are things that do not require to be said. It may rather be the case in our own time that mere industry is overvalued; and certainly a natural care for the spiritual interests of our brethren, not Pharisaic, but Christian, not meddlesome, but most earnest, can never be in excess. It is the busybody whose interference is resented; the brother, once he is recognised as a brother, is made welcome.

Convinced as he is that for mankind in general "no work" means "no character," Paul commands and exhorts in the Lord Jesus all such as he has been speaking of to work with quietness, and to eat their own bread. Their excitement was both unnatural and unspiritual. It was necessary for their moral health that they should escape from it, and learn how to walk orderly, and to live at their post. The quietness of which he speaks is both inward and outward. Let them compose their minds, and cease from their fussiness; the agitation within, and the distraction without, are equally fruitless. Far more beautiful, far more Christlike, than any busybody, however zealous, is he who works with quietness and eats his own bread. Probably the bulk of the Thessalonian Church was quite sound in this matter; and it is to encourage them that the Apostle writes, "But ye, brethren, be not weary in well-doing." The bad behaviour of the busybodies may have been provoking to some, infectious in the case of others; but they are to persevere, in spite of it, in the path of quiet industry and good conduct. This has not the pretentiousness of an absorbed waiting for the Lord, and a vaunted renunciation of the world; but it has the character of moral loveliness; it exercises the new man in the powers of the new life.

Along with his judgment on this moral disorder, the Apostle gives the Church directions for its treatment. It is to be met with reserve, protest, and love.

First, with reserve: "Withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly, and not after the tradition which they received of us; note that man, that ye have no company with him." The Christian community has a character to keep, and that character is compromised by the misconduct of any of its members. To such misconduct, therefore, it cannot be, and should not be, indifferent: indifference would be suicidal. The Church exists to maintain a moral testimony, to keep up a certain standard of conduct among men; and when that standard is visibly and defiantly departed from, there will be a reaction of the common conscience in the Church, vigorous in proportion to her vitality. A bad man may be quite at home in the world; he may find or make a circle of associates like himself; but there is something amiss, if he does not find himself alone in the Church. Every strong life closes itself against the intrusion of what is alien to it-a strong moral life most emphatically of all. A wicked person of any description ought to feel that the public sentiment of the Church is against him, and that as long as he persists in his wickedness he is virtually, if not formally, excommunicated. The element of communion in the Church is spiritual soundness; "If we walk in the light as He is in the light, we have fellowship one with another." But if anyone begins to walk in darkness, he is out of the fellowship. The only hope for him is that he may recognise the justice of his exclusion, and, as the Apostle says, be ashamed. He is shut out from the society of others that he may be driven in upon himself, and compelled, in spite of wilfulness, to judge himself by the Christian standard.

But reserve, impressive as it may be, is not enough. The erring brother is to be admonished; that is, he is to be gravely spoken to about his error. Admonition is a difficult duty. Not everyone feels at liberty, or is at liberty, to undertake it. Our own faults sometimes shut our mouths; the retort courteous, or uncourteous, to any admonition from us, is too obvious. But though such considerations should make us humble and diffident, they ought not to lead to neglect of plain duty. To think too much of ones faults is in some circumstances a kind of perverted vanity; it is to think too much of oneself. We have all our faults, of one kind or another; but that does not prohibit us from aiding each other to overcome faults. If we avoid anger and censoriousness; if we shun, as well as disclaim, the spirit of the Pharisee, then with all our imperfections God will justify us in speaking seriously to others about their sins. We do not pretend to judge them; we only appeal to themselves to say whether they are really at ease when they stand on one side, and the word of God and the conscience of the Church on the other. In a sense, this is specially the duty of the elders of the Church. It is they who are pastors of the flock of God, and who are expressly responsible for this moral guardianship; but there is no officialism in the Christian community which limits the interest of any member in all the rest, or exempts him from the responsibility of pleading the cause of God with the erring. How many Christian duties there are which seem never to have come in the way of some Christians.

Finally, in the discipline of the erring, an essential element is love. Withdraw from him, and let him feel he is alone; admonish him, and let him be convinced he is gravely wrong; but in your admonition remember that he is not an enemy, but a brother. Judgment is a function which the natural man is prone to assume, and which he exercises without misgiving. He is so sure of himself, that instead of admonishing, he denounces; what he is bent upon is not the reclamation, but the annihilation, of the guilty. Such a spirit is totally out of place in the Church; it is a direct defiance of the spirit which created the Christian community, and which that community is designed to foster. Let the sin be never so flagrant, the sinner is a brother; he is one for whom Christ died. To the Lord who brought him he is inexpressibly valuable; and woe to the reprover of sin who forgets this. The whole power of discipline which is committed to the Church is for edification, not for destruction; for the building up of Christian character, not for pulling it down. The case of the offender is the case of a brother; if we are true Christians, it is our own. We must act toward him and his offence as Christ acted toward the world and its sin: no judgment without mercy, no mercy without judgment. Christ took the sin of the world on Himself, but He made no compromise with it; He never extenuated it; He never spoke of it or treated it but with inexorable severity. Yet though the sinful felt to the depth of their hearts His awful condemnation of their sins, they felt that in assenting to that condemnation there was hope. To them, as opposed to their sins, He was winning, condescending, loving. He received sinners, and in His company they sinned no more.

Thus it is that in the Christian religion everything comes back to Christ and to the imitation of Christ. He is the pattern of those simple and hardy virtues, industry and steadfastness. He wrought at His trade in Nazareth till the hour came for Him to enter on His supreme vocation; who can undervalue the possibilities of goodness in the lives of men who work with quietness and eat their own bread, that remembers it was over a village carpenter the heavenly voice sounded, "This is My beloved Son"? Christ is the pattern also for Christian discipline in its treatment of the erring. No sinner could feel himself, in his sin, in communion with Christ: the Holy One instinctively withdrew from him, and he felt he was alone. No offender had his offence simply condoned by Jesus: the forgiveness of sins which He bestows includes condemnation as well as remission; it is wrought in one piece out of His mercy and His judgment. But neither, again, did any offender, who bowed to Christs judgment, and suffered it to condemn him, find himself excluded from His mercy. The Holy One was the sinners friend. Those whom He at first repelled were irresistibly drawn to Him. They begun, like Peter, with "Depart from me, for I am a sinful man, O Lord"; they ended, like him, with "Lord, to whom shall we go?" This, I say, is the pattern which is set before us, for the discipline of the erring. This includes reserve, admonition, love, and much more: If there be any other commandment, it is summarily comprehended in this word, "Follow Me."

William Robertson Nicoll, ed., The Expositor's Bible (London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1887–1910) — public domain. 65 of 66 books (1 Corinthians is not separately keyed, as that volume carries no machine-parseable verse references); section-level commentary keyed to the opening verse. Introductory and overview sections not keyed to a specific passage are excluded.

3:6-15 In his previous letter, Paul had addressed the problem of lazy members of the church who refused to work (1 Thes 4:11-12; 5:14). Some had ignored his message and example, so he gives additional instruction for dealing with these members.

3:6 Paul’s command is given by the authority of the Lord Jesus Christ (1 Thes 4:2). • Church members should shun Christians who live idle lives (see 2 Thes 3:7, 11-13; 1 Thes 5:14). To stay away from the lazy would make a strong impression on them (Matt 18:17; Rom 16:17; 1 Cor 5:9-13), promoting shame (2 Thes 3:14) and repentance, but stopping short of excommunication (3:15).

Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

2Th 3:6. Στέλλεσθαι) This word is properly applied to sailors and travellers, to be bound for some place, or to set out from some place. Hence to avoid; comp. 2Th 3:14. He keeps the Thessalonians in suspense, until at 2Th 3:11 he brings out the matter, at which he was aiming. They seem to have given up labour on account of the near approach of the day of Christ. The admonitions of the first epistle were more gentle; in the second, there is now some degree of complaint, although that complaint regards a slip of that kind which only tempts minds of high (spiritual) attainments.—πάντος, from every) although he may be otherwise walking speciously [with a fair show].—ἀτάκτως, disorderly) Therefore the Order of Mendicants is not an order, but a burden [2Th 3:8, ἐπιβαρῆσαι] upon the republic, 2Th 3:8. If the Thessalonians had bound themselves by a vow, what would Paul have said?

Bengel's Gnomon of the New Testament — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1860) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

2Th_3:6. Παραγγέλλομεν δέ] An application of the general ἃ παραγγέλλομεν, 2Th_3:4, to a special case.

ἐν ὀνόματι τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν ʼΙ. Χρ.] belongs to παραγγέλλομεν, not to what follows. A solemn reference to the high authority for this injunction. Comp. 1Co_5:4.

στέλλεσθαι ἀπό τινος] to withdraw himself from every one, to avoid his company. Comp. ὑποστέλλειν ἑαυτόν, Gal_2:12, and ὑποστέλλεσθαι, Heb_10:38.

ἀτάκτως] see on 1Th_5:14.

κατὰ τὴν παράδοσιν, ἣν κ.τ.λ.] refers not to instruction by the example of the apostle (Chrysostom, Theodoret, Oecumenius, Theophylact, Hofmann), which is first mentioned in what follows, but to the definite instruction which the apostle had given to them orally, during his presence at Thessalonica (comp. 2Th_3:10; 1Th_4:11), and then confirmed by writing (1Th_4:11-12).

παρελάβοσαν] A well-known constructio ad sensum adapted to the collective form ἀπὸ παντὸς ἀδελφοῦ. See Kühner, II. p. 42.

On the verbal form, comp. Sturz, de dial. Alex. p. 60; Lobeck, ad Phryn. p. 349.

2Th_3:6-15. Dehortation from a disorderly and idle life in the church. Paul had already touched upon this subject in his First Epistle (1Th_4:11-12, 1Th_5:14). But here it is more expressly treated, and also with greater severity, because, without doubt, in the restless and fanatical excitement of spirits on account of the advent, this evil had greatly increased instead of diminishing. Paul represents the core of the church as free from this fault; he exhorts them to withdraw themselves from every Christian brother living disorderly, in order to bring him to shame and amendment. Only in 2Th_3:12 does he direct his apostolic word to the erring brethren themselves.

Meyer — Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament — English translation by Peter Christie, edited by Frederick Crombie (T&T Clark, 1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

2Th 3:6-16 . Injunctions upon church-life and order.

2Th 3:6 . How necessary it was to promote ὑπομονή with its attendant virtues of diligence and order at Thessalonica, is evident from the authoritative ( ἐν ὀν . τ . Κυρίου ) tone and the crisp detail of the following paragraph. Παραγγ ., like ἀτάκτως , has a military tinge ( cf. on I. 1Th 4:2 , and Dante’s Paradiso , xii. 37 45). στελλ ., for his own sake (2Th 3:14 ), as well as for yours: a service as well as a precaution. The collective action of his fellow-Christians, besides preserving (1Co 5:6 ) themselves from infection and nothing is so infectious as an insubordinate, indolent, interfering spirit will bring home to him a sense of his fault. Lightfoot aptly cites the παράγγελμα of Germanicus to his mutinous troops: “discedite a contactu, ac diuidite turbidos: id stabile ad paenitentiam, id fidei uinculum erit” (Tacit. Annal. , i. 43). The ἄτακτοι of 6 12 are excitable members who “break the ranks” by stopping work in view of the near advent, and thus not only disorganise social life but burden the church with their maintenance. The apostles had not been idle or hare-brained enthusiasts, and their example of an orderly, self-supporting life is held up as a pattern. Insubordination of this kind is a breach of the apostolic standard of the Christian life, and Paul deals sharply with the first symptoms of it. He will not listen to any pious pleas for this kind of conduct.

The Expositor's Greek Testament, edited by W. Robertson Nicoll (1897–1910) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

§ 5. 2Th 3:6-15. THE CASE OF THE IDLERS

This section contains the chief matter pointed to in τὸ λοιπόν of 2Th 3:1 (see note above). But the added homily is no afterthought; it is of only second importance to the topic of 2Th 2:1-12. In the former Ep. the writers had occasion to exhort their readers to a quiet life and to the continued pursuit of their secular avocations (1Th 4:11 f.). The call to enter the kingdom of God and seek its glory brought men of a naturally idle or restless disposition under temptation upon this score. To such natures the rumours current about the Day of the Lord (2Th 2:1 f.) would appeal with particular force. “If Christ is on the point of appearing and the end of this evil world is so near, of what use are worldly occupations?” they would say; “to prepare to meet Him is the only business now worth minding. How can a Christian man interest himself any longer in the market or the field, in the tradesman’s books or the craftsman’s tools, when to-morrow the Lord may be here and the whole ‘fashion of this world’ may have passed away?” (cf. 1Co 7:29-31). Their conduct tended to general disorder (2Th 3:11), and brought reproach on the Christian community at Thessalonica. Moreover they did the Church a material injury, by throwing the burden of their maintenance on their industrious brethren, who would not see them starve. These ἀτάκτως περιπατοῦντες were called οἱ ἄτακτοι in 1Th 5:12 ff. (see note introductory to § 10); they had given trouble to the προϊστάμενοι, whom the body of the Church were bidden loyally to support. The mild and somewhat indirect reproofs of the former Epistle had been insufficient to check this mischief, which was subsequently aggravated by the false announcements about the Parousia. Such wild reports were calculated to disturb even those most regular and conscientious in following their daily duties. So the Apostles, having calmed the agitation of the readers by what they have said in ch. 2, proceed to rebuke in strong terms the irregularity thus unhappily stimulated.

The παραγγελία runs as follows: (1) First, and last, the avoidance is enjoined of those persistent in disorder (who are, notwithstanding, “brethren” still, 2Th 3:6; 2Th 3:15), 2Th 3:6; 2Th 3:14; (2) the missionaries recall their personal example and instructions bearing upon this matter, 2Th 3:7-10; (3) the “idlers and meddlers” are solemnly required to amend, and the rest to avoid their example, 2Th 3:11-13; (4) the Church is urged, while eschewing fellowship with the wrong-doers, to seek their reformation, 2Th 3:14-15. It is to be observed, in comparing this instruction with 1Th 5:12 ff., that no further mention is made in this connexion of the προϊστάμενοι (Elders); the Church as a whole is charged with the discipline necessary; the disorder has grown to larger proportions and become more acute: cf. 1Co 5:4 ff.; 2Co 2:6, ἡ ἐπιτιμία … ἡ ὑπὸ τῶν πλειόνων.

6. ημων, after κυριου, supplied by אADcGKLP &c., is wanting in BD*, Cyp: a suspicious complement; cf. 2Th 2:1.

(a) παρελαβετε, in BG 43 73 80 go syrhcl, Or Thdrt Ambrst;

(b) παρελαβοσαν, א*A, D* (without παρ-), 17, Bas; WH margin.

The Latin Versions and Fathers, generally, read the 3rd plural;

(c) παρελαβον, אcDb, cKLP;

(d) παρελαβε, in a few minn., syrpeah, Oec.

παρελαβοσαν (see Expos. Note on the grammatical ending) is the hardest reading, and best accounts for the others. Weiss, however, says it “betrays the Alexandrian emendators.”

παρελαβετε, obvious in itself, may have been further suggested by 1Th 4:1. On the other hand, WH, who agree with Weiss in preferring (a), think that -οσαν may be due to an “ocular confusion with -οσιν (παραδοσιν) in the line above” (Appendix, p. 165).

For παρʼ ημων B has αφʼ ημων, which Weiss deems original, explaining παρʼ as an assimilation to the verb, and to 1Th 2:13; 1Th 4:1.

6. Παραγγέλλομεν δὲ ὑμῖν, ἀδελφοί, ἐν ὀνόματι τοῦ κυρίου [ἡμῶν] Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ. But we charge you, brothers, in the name of the [or our] Lord Jesus Christ. The general ἃ παραγγέλλομεν (2Th 3:4: see note) is particularized; and the confidence in the loyalty of the readers there expressed is put to proof. The charge is addressed to “brothers”; it is not the mere command of a superior, but appeals to the sense of a common duty in the readers. At the same time, it is a command—not a personal wish, nor advice open to debate and qualification; it is delivered ἐν ὀνόματι τοῦ κυρ. Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ—on the authority of “Jesus Christ” as “Lord” of His people, by those who have the right to speak “in” His “name”: see note on ἐν κυρίῳ Ἰησοῦ, 1Th 4:1, and cf. 2Th 3:12 below; also Rom 1:5; 1Co 5:4; Php 2:9 ff.; Col 3:17; Jas 5:10. After the disregard of their admonition in Epistle I., the writers feel they must speak in the most peremptory and solemn tone; they pronounce as judges in the Sovereign’s name. They speak collectively, since the action taken devolves on them in their joint responsibility for the well-being of the Church.

στέλλεσθαι ὑμᾶς ἀπὸ παντὸς ἀδελφοῦ ἀτάκτως περιπατοῦντος, that you hold aloof from every brother walking in disorderly fashion. Παραγγέλλω takes the regular infin., as in 1Ti 1:3 and often in St Luke; construed with ἵνα of the thing commanded in Mar 6:8; with ὅτι in 2Th 3:10, by way of apposition to the immediate object τοῦτο. The verb στέλλομαι (middle)—synon. with μὴ συναναμίγνυσθαι (2Th 3:14)—signifies (transitively) to avoid in 2Co 8:20, the only other N.T. example; cf. however ὑποστέλλομαι, ὑποστολή, Heb 10:38 f., Act 20:20; Act 20:27. Apparently this meaning, to contract, to draw within oneself—sometimes to shrink, flinch—is derived from the maritime figure of furling or shortening sail—ἱστία στέλλἐιν (lit. to set, fix in position) or στέλλεσθαι (Homer, &c.: see examples in Liddell and Scott); it is complemented by ἀπό also in Mal 2:5 (LXX). Ἀπὸ … ἀδελφοῦ: for this is a matter between “brethren” (cf. 2Th 3:15; 1Co 5:11 f.). The general avoidance of the man will be at once a punishment for him and a safeguard to the rest (2Th 3:13), who might be infected by his company. This implies surely exclusion from Church-meetings, including the Agapé and the Lord’s Supper; but it is not an absolute bar to personal intercourse: cf. 2Th 3:15. For ἀτάκτως, see note on 1Th 5:14—the adverb is a N.T. hap. leg.—also 2Th 3:7; 2Th 3:11 below; for περιπατεῖν, 1Th 2:12. Bengel observes on ἀτάκτως, “Igitur Ordo mendicantium non est ordo, sed gravat rempublicam ipsam” (2Th 3:8).

καὶ μὴ κατὰ τὴν παράδοσιν ἣν παρελάβετε [or -οσαν] παρʼ ἡμῶν, and not in accordance with the tradition which you [or they] received from us. Μὴ (περιπατοῦντος) κατὰ τὴν παράδοσιν κ.τ.λ.—not οὐ—for this is an assumed condition of the στέλλεσθαι: see Winer-Moulton on μή with participles, pp. 606 ff. (μή encroaches on οὐ in this connexion in later Greek: cf. 2Th 1:8, 2Th 2:12); for οὐ with participles, cf. 2Co 4:8, Col 2:19, &c. For περιπατεῖν κατά κ.τ.λ. (Hebraistic), cf. Mar 7:5; the phrase is elsewhere only Pauline in N.T.—Rom 8:4; Rom 14:15, 1Co 3:3, 2Co 10:2, Eph 2:2. For παράδοσις, see note on 2Th 2:15; this includes παραγγελία as well as διδαχή: cf. 1Co 4:17; 1Co 11:2; 1Th 4:1 above.

The irregular παρελάβοσαν is strongly attested (see Textual Note): the harshness of the concord (the third plural referring to παντὸς ἀδελφοῦ), beside the anomalous ending, makes the substitution of -οσαν for -ετε on the part of copyists unlikely. At the same time the 3rd plural -οσαν, for imperfect and strong aorist indicative (also for optatives), is established in the κοινή (LXX; rare in Papyri: see Winer-Schmiedel, Grammatik, pp. 112 f.); Rom 3:13 (from LXX) and Joh 15:22; Joh 15:24, in the critical texts, afford examples. The termination is an Æolic (Bœotian) contribution to the mixed vernacular κοινή, favoured perhaps by the tendency to parisyllabic inflexional endings. On παραλαμβάνω, see 1Th 2:13.

6. THE LUTHERAN DOCTRINE OF ANTICHRIST

Martin Luther’s historic protest adversus execrabilem bullam Antichristi inaugurated the Reformation in 1520 A.D. It was one of Luther’s firmest convictions, shared by all the leading Reformers of the 16th century, that Popery is the Antichrist of prophecy; Luther expected that it would shortly be destroyed by Christ in His second advent. This belief was made a formal dogma of the Lutheran Church by the standard Articles of Smalkald in 1537 A.D.[9] It has a place in the English Bible; the translators in their address to James I. credit that monarch with having given, by a certain tractate he had published against the Pope, “such a blow unto that Man of Sin, as will not be healed.” Bishop Jewel’s Exposition of the Thessalonian Epistles, delivered in the crisis of England’s revolt from Rome, is the most characteristic piece of native Reformation exegesis, and gives powerful expression to the Lutheran view. In the 17th century, however, this interpretation was called in question amongst English Divines. The late Christopher Wordsworth, in his Lectures on the Apocalypse, and in his Commentary on the New Testament, has contributed a learned and earnest vindication of the traditional Protestant position.

[9] Melanchthon admitted a second Antichrist in Muhammad. He distinguished between the Eastern and Western Antichrists. The conjuction of Pope and Turk was common with our Protestant forefathers.

This theory has impressive arguments in its favour, drawn both from Scripture and history. It contains important elements of truth, and applied with great cogency to the Papacy of the later Middle Ages. But many reasons forbid us to identify the Papal system with St Paul’s ἄνθρωπος τῆς ἀνομίας. Two considerations must here suffice: (1) the Apostle’s words describe, as the Fathers saw, a personal Antichrist; they cannot be satisfied by any mere succession of men or system of Antichristian evil. (2) His Man of Lawlessness is to be the avowed opposer and displacer of God, and had for his type such rulers as Antiochus Epiphanes and the worst of the deified Cæsars. Now however gross the idolatry of which the Pope has been the object, and however daring and blasphemous the pretensions of certain occupants of the Papal Chair, Romanism does not, either openly or virtually, exalt its chief ἐπὶ πάντα λεγόμενον θεὸν ἢ σέβασμα; one must seriously weaken and distort the language of the Apostle to adjust it to the claims of the Roman Pontiff. The Roman Catholic system has multiplied, instead of abolishing, objects of worship; its ruling errors have not been those of atheism, but of superstition. At the same time, its adulation of the Pope and the priesthood has debased the religious instinct of Christendom; it has nursed the spirit of anthropolatry—the man-worship, which St Paul believed was to find in the Man of Lawlessness its culminating object.

Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges (Cambridge University Press, 1896; 21 vols, various authors incl. Carr, Maclear, Plummer, Farrar, Lumby, Moule, M. R. James, Simcox) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Fourthly, he saith, that idle and lazy persons ought not to be relieved of the Church, nay, that they are not to be suffered.

Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain. Text via Bolls.life.

we command you--Hereby he puts to a particular test their obedience in general to his commands, which obedience he had recognized in Th2 3:4.

withdraw--literally, "to furl the sails"; as we say, to steer clear of (compare Th2 3:14). Some had given up labor as though the Lord's day was immediately coming. He had enjoined mild censure of such in Th1 5:14, "Warn . . . the unruly"; but now that the mischief had become more confirmed, he enjoins stricter discipline, namely, withdrawal from their company (compare Co1 5:11; Jo2 1:10-11): not a formal sentence of excommunication, such as was subsequently passed on more heinous offenders (as in Co1 5:5; Ti1 1:20). He says "brother," that is, professing Christian; for in the case of unprofessing heathen, believers needed not be so strict (Co1 5:10-13).

disorderly--Paul plainly would not have sanctioned the order of Mendicant Friars, who reduce such a "disorderly" and lazy life to a system. Call it not an order, but a burden to the community (BENGEL, alluding to the Greek, Th2 3:8, for "be chargeable," literally, "be a burden").

the tradition--the oral instruction which he had given to them when present (Th2 3:10), and subsequently committed to writing (Th1 4:11-12).

which he received of us--Some oldest manuscripts read, "ye received"; others, "they received." The English Version reading has no very old authority.

Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Verse 6. That ye withdraw yourselves] Have no fellowship with those who will not submit to proper discipline; who do not keep their place; ατακτως, such as are out of their rank, and act according to their own wills and caprices; and particularly such as are idle and busybodies. These he had ordered, 1Th 4:11-12, that they should study to be quiet, mind their own business, and work with their hands; but it appears that they had paid no attention to this order, and now he desires the Church to exclude such from their communion.

And not after the tradition] This evidently refers to the orders contained in the first epistle; and that first epistle was the tradition which they had received from him. It was, therefore, no unwritten word, no uncertain saying, handed about from one to another; but a part of the revelation which God had given, and which they found in the body of his epistle. These are the only traditions which the Church of God is called to regard.

Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

He now proceeds to the correcting of a particular fault. As there were some indolent, and at the same time curious and prattling persons, who, in order that they might scrape together a living at the expense of others, wandered about from house to house, he forbids that their indolence should be encouraged by indulgence, and teaches that those live holily who procure for themselves the necessaries of life by honorable and useful labor. And in the first place, he applies the appellation of disorderly persons, not to those that are of a dissolute life, or to those whose characters are stained by flagrant crimes, but to indolent and worthless persons, who employ themselves in no honorable and useful occupation. For this truly is ἀταξία, (disorder, ) — not considering for what purpose we were made, and regulating our life with a view to that end, while it is only when we live according to the rule prescribed to us by God that this life is duly regulated. Let this order be set aside, and there is nothing but confusion in human life. This, also, is worthy to be noticed, lest any one should take pleasure in exercising himself apart from a legitimate call from God: for God has distinguished in such a manner the life of men, in order that every one may lay himself out for the advantage of others. He, therefore, who lives to himself alone, so as to be profitable in no way to the human race, nay more, is a burden to others, giving help to no one, is on good grounds reckoned to be ἄτακτος, (disorderly.) Hence Paul declares that such persons must be put away from the society of believers, that they may not bring dishonor upon the Church.

6 Now we command you in the name. Erasmus renders it — “by the name,” as if it were an adjuration. While I do not altogether reject this rendering, I, at the same time, am rather of opinion that the particle in is redundant, as in very many other passages, and that in accordance with the Hebrew idiom. Thus the meaning will be, that this commandment ought to be received with reverence, not as from a mortal man, but as from Christ himself; and Chrysostom explains it in this manner. This withdrawment, however of which he speaks, relates — not to public excommunication but to private intercourse. For he simply forbids believers to have any familiar intercourse with drones of this sort, who have no honorable means of life, in which they may exercise themselves. He says, however, expressly — from every brother, because if they profess themselves to be Christians they are above all others intolerable, inasmuch as they are, in a manner, the pests and stains of religion.

Not according to the injunction — namely, that which we shall find him shortly afterwards adding — that food should not be given to the man that refuses to labor. Before coming to this, however, he states what example he has given them in his own person. For doctrine obtains much more of credit and authority, when we impose upon others no other burden than we take upon ourselves. Now he mentions that he himself was engaged in working with his hands night and day, that he might not burden any one with expense. He had, also, touched somewhat on this point in the preceding Epistle — to which my readers must have recourse for a fuller explanation of this point.

As to his saying, that he had not eaten any one’s bread for naught, he assuredly would not have done this, though he had not labored with his hands. For that which is due in the way of right, is not a thing that is gratuitous, and the price of the labor which teachers lay out in behalf of the Church, is much greater than the food which they receive from it. But Paul had here in his eye inconsiderate persons, for all have not so much equity and judgment as to consider what remuneration is due to the ministers of the word. Nay more, such is the niggardliness of some, that, though they contribute nothing of their own, they, envy them their living, as if they were idle men. He, also, immediately afterwards declares that he waived his right, when he refrained from taking any remuneration, by which he intimates, that it is much less to be endured, that those, who do nothing, shall live on what belongs to others. When he says, that they know how they ought to imitate, he does not simply mean that his example should be regarded by them as a law, but the meaning is, that they knew what they had seen in him that was worthy of imitation, nay more, that the very thing of which he is at present speaking, has been set before them for imitation.

John Calvin's Commentaries (1540-1563) — public domain. Text from the Calvin Translation Society English edition (1840s-50s) via the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (ccel.org). Calvin's coverage is partial (roughly two-thirds of the Bible); uncommented books and verses are honest gaps, never fabricated. The 19th-century editor's footnotes and remarks are omitted so the notes are faithfully Calvin's own voice.

Now we command you, brethren,.... The apostle is now come to the main thing itself he has in view in this part of the epistle, which is to encourage a regard to the discipline of God's house; and to exhort this church to excommunicate, or remove from communion, all disorderly persons; and those who are to do this he points out, and calls upon, and even commands; and these are the fraternity, the "brethren", the society of believers, all the members of the church; for to them to whom belongs the power of receiving members, to them only belongs the power of excluding offenders: the executive power lies in the hands of the elders or pastors of churches; they are the persons by whom the church receives or casts out members; but the power of judgment, or of determining who shall be received into, or who shall be removed from communion, lies in the church, and not in the pastors and elders only; whoever therefore take upon them to receive, or refuse, or cast out members of themselves, and at their own pleasure, act the part of Diotrephes, Jo3 1:9. The authority for removing disorderly persons from communion is an apostolical command, "we command you"; who are the apostles of Christ, immediately sent by him, who had their mission and commission from him, and which were confirmed by miracles; these had a greater power and authority than the ordinary ministers of the word; they were the ambassadors of Christ, stood in his stead, represented him, and acted in his name; what they said, he spake by them; and it was all one as if he had spoke it himself: and that this might appear not to be of them, but of him, it is added,

in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ; that is, by his power and authority, if they had any regard to that, or to his honour and glory:

that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly; by a brother is meant, not one in a natural or civil sense, who is so by blood, or by neighbourhood, by being of the same country, or of the same human species, since all are of one blood; but one in an ecclesiastical sense, a church member, who is called a brother, though he may not be really a child of God, one of the brethren of Christ, or born of the Spirit; yet being a fellow citizen with the saints, and of the household of God externally, he bears this character; and such an one only is cognizable by a church, who have nothing to do to judge them that are without, only them that are within: and "every brother" in this sense falls under their notice; everyone that is a member, whether male or female, for this word includes both; and as the sisters, as well as the brethren, stand in the same relation, are in the same church state, partake of the same ordinances, and enjoy the same privileges, they are obliged to regard the same rules of the Gospel, and duties of religion, and, in case of disorder, to be withdrawn from: and this also regards every brother, of whatsoever state or condition, bond or free, high or low, rich or poor; no partiality is to be used, no preference to be given to one above the other; a poor member in a disorder is not to be bore hard upon, while a rich one is winked and connived at: and it also respects the brethren, whether private members, or officers of the church; for not only the former, but also the latter, when they walk disorderly, whether in the discharge of their office, or in any other part of their conduct, are liable to the notice and censure of the church: and which is only to be done when any of them "walk disorderly"; not for every disorder they are guilty of; there is no man lives without sin; and church members have their infirmities, and will have, as long as they are in the flesh, or in the body; and they are not to be made offenders for a word, or for a single disorder, or for the common infirmities of life; nor are the just to be set aside for a thing of nought, or a small offence, and that not continued in: it is one thing to be guilty of a disorder, and another thing to walk disorderly; which denotes a way, a course, a series of disorder, and proceeding on in it, a going from evil to evil, an increasing to more ungodliness; for walking is a progressive action, and disorderly persons do not stop, but grow worse and worse; for they take pleasure in their disorders; they choose their own ways, and delight in their abominations; the paths of sin are pleasant paths to them: and they are disorderly walkers, who pertinaciously and stubbornly continue in their disorders, notwithstanding the admonitions of private persons, and of the whole church; and of this sort there are such that walk disorderly in the world, in the commission of notorious and scandalous sins, such as uncleanness, intemperance, covetousness, &c. and that walk disorderly in families; as husbands that are not affectionate to their wives, and provide not for their household; and wives that are not in subjection to their husbands; parents that provoke their children to wrath; and children that are disobedient to their parents; masters who give not that which is fit and equal to their servants; and servants that despise their masters because they are brethren, when they should serve them the more cheerfully, because faithful and beloved: and also that walk disorderly in churches, that fill not up their places, but neglect attendance with the church, on the word and ordinances; and who are contentious and quarrelsome, and will not submit to the sentiments of those who are superior to them in number and sense; and likewise such who entertain bad notions and principles, derogatory to the grace of God, the person and offices of Christ, and the operations of the Spirit; who walk, not in the truth, nor according to the standard of the word of God; and especially such are designed here, who are busy bodies, and idle persons, who work not at all, but live at the tables, and upon the substance of others, as appears from Th2 3:11. These act contrary to the order and decorum of nations, towns, and families, and to that which God has fixed among mankind; and to the example of God, and Christ as God, who work hither to and jointly together in Providence, and in the government of the world; and to the example which Christ, as man, has set, and to the example of the apostles, and to their commands: wherefore it follows,

and not after the tradition which he received of us; meaning either the Gospel of Christ, which being, preached was received, but the walk and conversation of some was not agreeably to it; or the ordinances of the Gospel, and the precepts of religion which the apostles delivered, and were received, and yet due attendance to them was not given; See Gill on Th2 2:15, or rather that particular injunction concerning quietness, and doing their own business, and working with their own hands, Th1 4:11. The Vulgate Latin version reads, "which they received of us": the sense is the same; and the Ethiopic version, "and not according to the constitution we appointed them". Now what is commanded to be done to such disorderly persons, by the church, even the whole fraternity, is to "withdraw" themselves from them; by which is meant, not only to distinguish themselves from them by an orderly and regular conversation, and a strict observance of Gospel discipline, which to do is very right; nor barely to curb and restrain the affections towards such persons, lest by carrying it as heretofore, in a kind, tender, and affectionate manner, they should take encouragement from hence to continue in their disorders, as tender parents keep in their affections, and from showing them to their children, when in disorder, and under their corrections, that they might not seem to countenance them in that which is evil, though this is also very proper; nor also merely to contract or shut up the hand to such persons, and refuse to distribute to then, living such an idle life, and in such a disorderly way, though this is what ought to be done; nor does this phrase only intend a forbidding such persons their houses and their tables, not suffering them to sit at the one, nor even to come into the other, not allowing any company and conversation with them, that they may have no opportunity of indulging their laziness and tale bearing, though so to serve them is highly just and reasonable; nor does it design only a suspension, or a debarring of them from the Lord's table, which ought not to be done to any persons, while they continue in relation to the church, and members of it; but a removal of them from church communion, or an excommunication of them; which is sometimes expressed by rejecting persons, casting them out of the church, and putting them away, and here by withdrawing from them; which are all synonymous phrases, and intend exclusion from the communion of the church. And so the Ethiopic version here renders it, "that ye remove every brother", &c. From this passage we learn who they are that are to be excommunicated or removed from the communion of churches, all disorderly walkers; what the act of excommunication is, it is a withdrawing from them, a separating them from the church, and its communion; and who they are that have the power to do it, the whole fraternity or body of the church; and also the authority for it, an apostolical command, in the name of Christ.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

6 Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly, and not after the tradition which he received of us.

Ver. 6. Now we command you] To show how hardly we are divided from evil company, as loth to depart as Lot’s wife out of Sodom, Velut canis famelicus ab uncto corio.

That ye withdraw yourselves] That ye shun them as studiously as the seaman doth a rock or shelf, στελλεσθαι, Nautarum proprium.

From every brother that walketh disorderly] From every profligate professor, and carnal gospeller, that walketh contra gnomonem et Canonem Decalogi, cuique vita est incomposita, et pessime morata (as an interpreter speaketh), contrary to God, and to every good work reprobate.

And not after the tradition] sc. That men should sweat out their living, and earn it before they eat it. Sin brought in sweat, Gen 3:19. And now, not to sweat, increaseth sin.

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Charge, or declare; or by the Greek, we command. --- In the name of our Lord. This may signify a separation by excommunication. (Witham) --- That you withdraw, &c. St. John Chrysostom upon this place, St. Augustine, Theophylactus, and others understand St. Paul as speaking of a kind of excommunication. But St. John Chrysostom on ver. 13. and 14. seems to restrain its meaning to a prohibition for the guilty to speak to any body, unless they spoke to him, if their conversation tended to exhort him to repentance. Theophylactus likewise remarks that this punishment was formerly much dreaded, though now not in use.

George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).

Here the apostle proceeds to a discourse of another kind, which is about their carriage to disorderly members in the church. And having before declared his confidence, 2Th 3:4, that they did and would do the things he commanded them, he now tells them what he commands; and because either it is a matter of great importance, or that which’they would be backward in, he therefore speaks with great vehemence. When he spake in the former Epistle, 1Th 5:14, of warning the unruly, he then spake with greater mildness:

We exhort you, brethren, & c.; but now to withdraw from them is a harsher duty; or they having first warned them, if they reform not, next they are to proceed to withdraw from them. And this he now commands as that which he supposeth they might be backward to. παραγγελλομεν the word properly signifies a command conveyed from another, so the apostle commands here

in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ. Though he had authority to command as an apostle, yet it was derived to him from Christ, and therefore he usually conjoins Christ with his exhortations and commands.

That ye withdraw yourselves from every brother; or avoid, as the word signifies, and is so rendered, 2Co 8:20. The word is used also, Gal 2:12, of Peter’s withdrawing himself from eating with the Gentiles; and rendered drawing back, Heb 10:38, alluding, as some think, there to a soldier that draws back from the battle; but here in the text to a mariner that steers his ship from the rocks; and so it implies the danger of not withdrawing, which may be the reason of the apostle’s so solemn command about it. And it is not from a heathen man, but a brother, one that is of the church; and it is every brother, let him be rich or poor, high or low, &c.; as he writes to the Corinthians, 1Co 5:11; If any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, & c.

That walketh disorderly: alluding, as some think, to soldiers who keep not their rank, not walking according to rule, or, as he expresseth it,

not after the tradition which he received of us. What is to be meant by tradition, is explained in the former chapter. And he cannot be understood to speak here of rites and ceremonies relating to church worship or order, as some imagine; the apostle doth in the following verses explain himself otherwise. But what is this withdrawing? Is it excommunication, the greater or the less? In a general sense it may be so called, for it is an abstaining from commnnion; but it is not so properly, for that is called putting away a person, a purging out the old leaven, 1Co 5:7, this is only a withdrawing from him; much less is it a delivering up to Satan, which the apostle required, 1Co 5:5, and himself inflicted upon Hymeneus and Alexander, 1Ti 1:20. The nature of the crime here mentioned will not bear that. It was not incest or blasphemy, as in the former instances, but only disorderly walking, which he specifies afterwards. And with respect to such the apostle required in the former Epistle warning only: Warn the unruly. And though this is something more, yet it implies not a casting a man out of the church, which is Christ’s visible kingdom, into Satan’s kingdom, for he is still to be admonished as a brother, as 2Th 3:15. And excommunication is the exerting an act of church power, as 1Co 5:4, whereof no mention is made here; or of an absolute rejection, which is elsewhere required, Tit 3:10. It seems then to be only a withdrawing from familiar converse and society, as 1Co 5:11; If any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, covetous, &c.; with such an one no not to eat; alluding to the custom of the Jews, who would not eat with the Gentiles; and by eating is expressed communion in Scripture, and profane writers also. And such communion is forbidden to such a brother, which the apostle allowed them to have with such sinners that were of the world, and not of the church, as 2Th 3:10, which cannot be meant of sacred communion. And familiarity with such a brother would harden him in his sins, and reflect dishonour upon religion, and endanger their infection, more than with a pagan, or infidel: which therefore the apostle forbids them to a brother, as he did the Corinthians mentioned before, as also the Romans, Rom 16:17. And which may be a step towards excommunication from spiritual communion, which is the greater punishment, especially if the brother be not hereby made ashamed, and reform his course, and doth not only now and then do a disorderly action, but

walketh disorderly, and that after warning also. Others think it is meant of excommunication, and judge not the reason against it to be cogent.

Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

Now we command you, brethren. An injunction, not specially directed to the elders or office bearers, but to the members, of the Church in general. (see 1Th_5:14) In the Name of the Lord Jesus Christ. Strengthening the command, as being given in the Name and authority of the great Head of the Church; not we, but Christ himself commands you. That ye withdraw yourselves. A nautical expression, denoting to "shorten the sails;" hence metaphorically to keep out of the way, to withdraw; that ye avoid intercourse and fellowship with; no allusion as yet to excommunication. From every brother follow Christianthat walketh disorderly; literally, out of the ranks (see 1Th_5:14) And not after the tradition; or, the instructions; not the example of the apostle, which is afterwards mentioned, but the instructions which he orally delivered when at Thessalonica, and subsequently confirmed by the Epistle which he had written to them. (see 2Th_2:15) Which he received of us. Here the readings of manuscripts differ. Some read "which you received of us," and others "which they," namely, those represented by the brother that walketh disorderly, "received of us" (so R.V).

Avoidance of evil company.

The apostle commands us to withdraw ourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly, and to have no fellowship with those who obey not his instructions. We must avoid making wicked men our companions, otherwise we shall soon be led astray and contaminated by their evil principles. The happiness or misery of the young for time and for eternity is, humanly speaking, dependent upon those whom they now choose as their intimate companions.

The apostle"s method of dealing with the idle busybodies of the Thessalonian Church.

This is one of the leading objects of this Epistle.

I THE NATURE OF THE OFFENCE REBUKED BY THE APOSTLE. "Withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly, and not after the tradition they received from us.

1. It was a habit of idleness caused by the unsettling tendency of the belief that the day of the Lords coming was near at hand to wind up all human affairs. They were, therefore, "working not at all," allowing themselves to be ignobly dependent either upon richer brethren or upon ecclesiastical funds.

2. Linked with this idle habit was the disposition to be busybodies concerning themselves with matters that did not belong to them. "Bishops in other men"s dioceses," as the figure of the apostle elsewhere describes the same class; (1Pe_4:15) like the younger widows who "were wandering about from house to house, and not only idle, but tattlers also and busybodies". (1Ti_5:13) This unworthy habit of life was a serious annoyance and interruption to neighbours, as well as an unwarranted tax upon the generosity of their rich patrons.

3. It was an aggravation of the offence that the offenders were not only brethren," but were living in deliberate disregard of the apostles oral instructions during his first visit to Thessalonica. "For even when we were with you, this we commanded you, that if any would not work, neither let him eat." Thus they showed a reckless defiance of apostolic counsel. This was surely to "break rank," as the word "disorder" suggests.

II THE APOSTLE"S COMMAND TO THE CHURCH RESPECTING THESE OFFENDERS.

1. The time was past for mere requests or exhortations. He had addressed them in this milder tone in the First Epistle: "We beseech you that ye study to be quiet, and do your own business". (1Th_4:11) But his request had been disregarded.

2. The command he now addresses to them was backed by Divine authority. "We command you in the Name of our Lord Jesus Christ.

(1) Because he is the Source of all authority in the Church;

(2) because the conduct of the Thessalonian busybodies was a dishonour to the Lord who bought them;

(3) because it was a command to which obedience could be secured so long as the Christians "directed their hearts into the love of God, and the patience of Christ.

3. It was a command to the body of the Church to withdraw themselves" from the disorderly brethren.

(1) It was no command to excommunicate them. It was no case of expulsion or exclusion from Church fellowship, but

(2) what may be called social excommunication. The brethren were to avoid all unnecessary intercourse with them, perhaps the richer members to encourage them no longer in their indolent and restless fanaticism by their ill-placed generosity, and thus bring them to a sense of shame and repentance for their laziness and talebearing. T.C.

Vers. 6-15.

The importance of the common duties of daily life shown.

I BY ST. PAUL"S EARNEST APPEALS.

1. He commands, and that in the Name of the Lord Jesus Christ. There were some among the Thessalonian Christians who walked disorderly, whose lives were not ordered according to the teaching which they had received from St. Paul. The Church generally was sound, as the Epistle shows, but there was a section that needed counsel and firm treatment. Probably the prevalent restlessness about the approach of the day of the Lord so filled their minds that it seemed hard to attend to less exciting matters. In view of an event so awful, the little details of daily occupation seemed trivial and insignificant. The whole course of life, with all its complex interests, might any moment be abruptly checked by the sudden coming of the Lord. It was hard to descend from the contemplation of a topic so absorbing to the little duties of work and everyday life. But the apostle commands, and that with the greatest earnestness. It is just in those little duties that our responsibility chiefly lies. It is in the small matters of daily life that the battle between good and evil is fought out for each individual soul. "The daily round, the common task," is the field in which we are trained for heaven; or, if not for heaven, it must be for hell. Ordinary lives are commonplace; they do not present opportunities for showy action; there are few emergencies, little excitement in them. The lives of most of us are, by God"s appointment, ordinary and commonplace; it is the discipline for eternity which he has provided for us. The quiet, faithful performance of those common duties is the best preparation for the coming of the Lord. He cannot find us better employed than in the work, whatever it may be, which his providence has given us to do. And, in truth, those commonplace lives afford ample opportunities for self-denial, if only we will use them; a road for drawing daily nearer to God, if only we will take the path pointed out by his providence, not some self-chosen way of our own.

2. A commonplace life may be in the eyes of the holy angels full of beauty and heroism. To do each little duty, as it comes, faithfully and thoroughly; to keep the thought of God"s presence constantly before us, and to try in all things, great and small alike, to please him; to persevere all the day, and every day, in the quiet life of duty; this involves a sustained effort, a lofty faith, a holy love, which are in the sight of God of great price. The life of duty, however humble and quiet that duty may be, is the life of holiness. Religious fervour, religious excitement, if it ends in excitement and does not issue in obedience, is but a counterfeit in the sight of God; it will not abide the day of his coming. In the First Epistle St. Paul had bidden the Thessalonians to study to be quiet, to do their own business, to work with their own hands. He speaks more strongly now. Probably the excitement had increased; it had led to the disorder which he condemns. He commands them now, and that in virtue of his apostolic authority, in the Name of the Lord Jesus Christ, whose ambassador he was. Sometimes God"s ministers must speak with authority. They must be instant in season, out of season; they must reprove, rebuke, exhort; but such rebukes will avail little, unless they are administered with much long suffering, with humility and godly fear, and enforced by that authority of character which only holiness of life can give. To possess such authority, a man must have that reality the absence of which is so soon detected; he must have that ready sympathy which is such a source of power and success in ministerial work.

3. They must withdraw themselves from every brother that walketh disorderly. St. Paul is not issuing a sentence cf excommunication, as in 1Co 5. and 1Ti_1:20. The conduct of these Thessalonians was not so utterly wicked as that of the incestuous person at Corinth; their errors were not so dangerous as those of Hymenaeus and Alexander. But they were neglecting the duties of their station; they were living in disobedience. It was not right for Christians to recognize such men as brethren; their lives were a scandal; they were bringing discredit upon the Christian name. True Christians must be jealous for their Master"s honour; they must sometimes show openly their disapprobation of inconsistency. It is a difficult and painful duty. It is necessary, in performing it, to keep a very careful watch over our own motives; to speak and act in deep humility and real charity; to cast first the beam out of our own eye; to remember the Saviour"s rule, "Judge not." But though a difficult duty, it is sometimes a duty. A true Christian must not live on terms of intimacy with men who disgrace their Christian profession. He will not walk in the counsel of the ungodly, nor stand in the way of sinners. All his delight will be in the saints who are on the earth. Especially he must avoid the companionship of those who make a great show of religion and live ungodly lives. No sin is more dangerous than hypocrisy; none is more strongly condemned by our Lord.

II BY HIS EXAMPLE.

1. He did not behave himself disorderly. He illustrated in his life the power of true religion. He was a man of warm affections, of enthusiastic character, full of high hopes; but he never allowed any excitement of feeling to interfere with the quiet performance of daily duties. His life and preaching supplemented one another. His preaching disclosed the motives which prompted his actions and regulated his life; his life was his preaching translated into action it showed the reality, the living force, of the truths which he preached.

2. He worked with his own hands. He always asserted the right of the apostles and their companions to maintenance from the Churches. The Lord hath ordained, he said, that they which preach the gospel should live of the gospel. But he did not claim this right for himself. It was not pride that prompted his conduct; he accepted the gifts of the Philippians. But he knew the value of an example of self-denying and absolutely disinterested labour. The Gentile world had never seen such a life. It was a power in itself; it constrained the admiration and won the hearts of men; it forced them to admit the reality of a religion which sustained him in such unparalleled self-sacrifices. So he would not eat any man"s bread for nought. For nought, he says in his humility; though he knew well that his converts in Thessalonica owed to him, like Philemonon, even their own selves. He wrought with his own hands, and that night and day. It was hard, uninteresting, ill-paid labour. It required the close application of many hours to earn even the simple livelihood which contented him. But he worked on in patience, knowing the power of example.

III HE INSISTS ON THE DUTY OF HONEST LABOUR.

1. Are had done so during his stay at Thessalonica. He had given his opinion in the words of a short, stern proverb, "If any will not work, neither let him eat." Labour is the ordinance of God; a punishment at first, (Gen_3:19) but it is turned into a blessing (Psa_128:2) to those who accept it as the will of God, and use it as a discipline of obedience and self-denial. Work, in some form or other, is a necessity for us; without work, life soon becomes dreary, full of restlessness and dissatisfaction. To have nothing to do is far from enviable; it is full of ennui and weariness. Time is a priceless talent, given us that we might work out our own salvation; to waste it day after day, to "kill time," as the saying is, is a miserable misuse of the good gifts of God. We must all work, if we would be happy here, if we would be ready to meet the Lord when he cometh. Mental labour is the lot of some, manual labour of others. God has ordered our lot and appointed our work. Work of some sort we must have. None have a right to eat their bread without labour, neither the rich nor the poor.

(1) If God has given us worldly means, still we have no right to eat the bread of idleness. We must find work to do, the work which the Master has set us. If we need not work for ourselves, we must work for others. There is work enough for all in the vineyard of the Lord; only in work can we find peace and satisfaction. Without work, we are eating the bread which we have not earned; without work, we must in the end be restless and unhappy; without work, how can we bear to read those awful words, "Thou wicked and slothful servant"?

(2) And the apostle forbids indiscriminate almsgiving. When the Lord said, "Give to him that asketh thee," he did not mean to the idle and the worthless. Give freely, but give to the old, the sick, the helpless. It is a difficult thing to give rightly; it needs study, thought, prayer. We must not encourage idleness, but neither must we allow our heart to be hardened by the imposture which we meet so often. Be generous, full of sympathy to the afflicted, but let the idle be corrected by the stern discipline of hunger. To give to such is doubly wrong; it encourages the slothful in their sinful idleness, and it robs the really poor.

2. He repeats his exhortation now. There were busybodies at Thessalonica, who neglected their own business, and busied themselves with matters which did not concern them, or with curious questions which were beyond their reach. It is always so with the idle; the restless thoughts must find occupation, and commonly find it in mischief. St. Paul exhorts them again. He does not sternly leave them to themselves; he longs for their spiritual welfare. He exhorts them, and that in the presence of the Lord Jesus Christ, to work with quietness; not to let excited feelings interfere with the quiet, well ordered life of Christian duty; but to eat their own bread, the bread earned by honest labour; not to live on the alms of others, when they might preserve a manly, Christian independence.

IV HE ASKS THE BRETHREN TO SUPPORT HIS EXHORTATIONS.

1. They must not be weary in well doing. There is much to make Christians weary; their own helplessness and sinfulness; the disappointments, misunderstandings, ingratitude, which they meet with in their work. But they must persevere in the quiet walk of duty; they must do good, seeking no reward save that which comes from our Father who seeth in secret. Weariness is hard to bear; it will press heavily upon us at times. We must run with patience the race that is set before us, looking always unto Jesus.

2. They must carry out his censures. His Epistle was an authoritative document; it came from the Lord"s apostle, armed with the Lord"s authority. It must be obeyed; it was the duty of the Church to enforce obedience. The brethren must show their concurrence with St. Paul by not keeping company with any professing Christians who may still persist in disorderly conduct. But they must be careful not to sin against the law of love. The offender is a brother still; they must admonish him for his soul"s sake; they must show by their conduct their sorrow, their disapproval of his disobedience, that the disapprobation of Christians known and respected may bring him to a sense of shame. and, by God"s grace, to amendment of life.

LESSONS.

1. Duty seems sometimes dull and prosaic, but it is our appointed path; doeach little duty as in the sight of God.

2. There is a true dignity in honest labour; never despise it in others; workyourself in the station to which God has called you.

3. Be careful in your choice of companions; avoid the disorderly; seek thesociety of the pious and obedient. B.C.C.

Vers. 6-15.

Duty of withdrawing from a disorderly brother.

I DUTY STATED. "Now we command you, brethren, in the Name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly, and not after the tradition which they received of us." The commandment, being in the Name of the Lord Jesus Christ, was as authoritative as though it had been given directly by him who has the absolute right to command in the Church. It was a commandment relating to a brother walking disorderly, and not after the received tradition. It is implied that a definite order had been appointed by the Lord for the conduct of members of the Church. This order, handed to the preachers, had been handed by them to the Thessalonians. But how was a brother to be dealt with who did not observe this order? Our Lord had laid down the rule with regard to one who offended directly against a brother. "And it thy brother sin against thee, go, show him his fault between thee and him alone: if he hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother. But if he hear thee not, take with thee one or two more, that at the mouth of two witnesses or three every word may be established. And if he refuse to hear them, tell it unto the Church: and if he refuse to hear the Church also, let him be unto thee as the Gentile and the publican." What we have here differs from that in being the case of one who by his conduct offended against the general order and reputation of the Church to which he belonged. In 1Co5 there is the ordaining of discipline in a case of very great scandal in the Corinthian Church. "For I verily, being absent in body, but present in spirit, have already, as though I were present, judged him that hath so wrought this thing, in the Name of our Lord Jesus Christ,... to deliver such a one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus." The disorderliness in the Thessalonian Church was not of the gravest nature. Nor was it disorderliness with the greatest amount of deliberation; but was rather the consequence of a false impression with regard to the coming. Nor was it the most confirmed disorderliness, being after clear enunciation of duty as shown in 1Th_4:11, 1Th_4:12, and, we may suppose, after warning as directed in 1Th_5:14; but disorderliness to which discipline had not yet been applied. There is allowed, then, to the disorderly person the position of brother, and apparently the right to sit down at the Lord"s table. But the right minded members of the Thessalonian community are directed to withdraw from him. Let him, in the way of discipline, be shunned in private intercourse. Let him be made clearly to understand that no countenance is given to him in his disorderly course.

II DUTY ENFORCED BY THE EXAMPLE OF THE PREACHERS. "For yourselves know how ye ought to imitate us: for we behaved not ourselves disorderly among you; neither did we eat bread for nought at any man"s hand, but in labour and travail, working night and day, that we might not burden any of you." An appeal is made to what was within their own knowledge and observation. They were aware, without their requiring to be told, that there had been nothing disorderly in the behaviour of the preachers among them. They had practised what they had taught. They had been an example in all particulars of the order of which they had been the medium of delivery. Special reference is made to their being an example of independence acquired by manual labour. It could not be said of them that they had eaten bread for nought at any man"s hand. They had eaten bread in labour and travail, working night and day, to be raised above the point of being burdensome to any of them. Very similar language is used in the First Epistle. "For ye remember, brethren, our labour and travail: working night and day, that we might not burden any of you." The thought there is that, by their having adopted this course, they were placed above all suspicion of selfishness. They were only givers to the Thessalonians, as mothers to their infant children. We are here told what led to their supporting themselves by the labour of their own hands. It was the consideration of example. In the excitement into which the Thessalonian Church had been thrown by the announcement of the coming, there had been early observed a tendency to neglect the duties of their worldly calling, which could only result in their making themselves a burden. To counteract this tendency, they had thrown the influence of their example into the scale of industry. As they were not burdensome to the Thessalonians, let none of them be burdensome to any. Reservation of right. "Not because we have not the right, but to make ourselves an example unto you, that ye should imitate us." As preachers they had the right to be maintained by those to whom they ministered. In preaching they were as much labouring giving out their strength, even the strength of their bodies as when they were tent making, or engaged in other manual labour. And, according to the principle which is brought in elsewhere, the labourer is worthy of his hire. In certain circumstances they felt free to accept of maintenance from those among whom they laboured, and thus to give their whole strength to spiritual work. Even at Thessalonica they felt free to accept of a gift from the Philippian Church. They did not feel free to accept of maintenance from the Thessalonian Church, simply because it was necessary, by their example, to encourage among them a spirit of independence in connection with diligence in performing the duties of their worldly calling.

III DUTY ENFORCED BY THE PLAIN MANNER IN WHICH THE PREACHERS HAD TAUGHT. "For even when we were with you, this we commanded you, If any will not work, neither let him eat." In the First Epistle it had been said, "And that ye study to he quiet, and to do your own business, anti to work with your hands, even as we charged you." The Thessalonians are now referred back, beyond that point, to the time when the preachers were with them. In prescribing starvation as the remedy for the shirking of labour, Christianity has a certain aspect of severity. And yet, in this respect, Christianity is only sanctified common sense. There may be doubt in particular cases whether a man has the ability to work or the opportunity to work. But there can be no doubt of this, that if he has the ability to work and the opportunity and will not work, then he should be allowed to starve. That is to say, let the struggle go on in him between hunger and indolence. There is no call for our interposing in the name of Christian charity, which needs to he salted with salt, if it would not lose its flavour. We may expect that the struggle will end in hunger gaining the mastery over his indolence. And there will be an experience gained which may make him a profitable member of society for the time to come. It is well that the Christian rule is so plainly laid down. For there is a false spiritualism that looks askance at labour. It has even been attempted to throw a Christian halo around idleness in the order of the mendicant monks. But there is a sensible practical tone about Christianity which must commend it even to those who are not in sympathy with its central teaching. We do not need to engage in our worldly business with a grudge, as though all the time gained to the body were lost to the soul. We may feel free, with Paul and Silas and Timothy, in labour and travail, to work night and day, that we may not be burdensome to any. There is indeed danger, and very great danger, of our going over to the other side, and neglecting our spiritual duties, becoming worldly in our business. But that is to go beyond the intention of Christ. He means that, by attention to our spiritual duties, we should be fitted for our worldly duties. He means that we should he mindful of him, and loyal to his laws in our worldly duties. He means that, through the right performance of our worldly duties, our highest spirituality should be promoted. And blessed is he who can work out this problem aright in his life.

IV OCCASION FOR LAYING DOWN THE DUTY. "For we hear of some that walk among you disorderly, that work not at all, but are busybodies." There were some, the few among them, who did not observe the order given by the Lord. Specially, they did not observe the Lord"s appointment of labor. They are described as working not at all. They were not idlers pure and simple, to begin with. They did not work, because they thought the coming was already commenced. They were really in a high state of tension. And, as their energies were not allowed scope at all within their proper work, they had to find scope in work beyond. This is brought out in the Greek as it cannot so well be brought out in the English translation. It is literally, and in a paradoxical way, "working nothing, but working beyond." They did not busy themselves with work that belonged to them; they even energetically busied themselves in a meddlesome way with work that did not belong to them.

V THE DISORDERLY BRETHREN ADDRESSED. "Now them that are such we command and exhort in the Lord Jesus Christ, that with quietness they work, and eat their own bread." The Lord"s authority and suasion is brought to bear on them as a class. It was not sufficient excuse for them that they took the Lord"s coming to be imminent:. Even though their impression had been well founded, they were not therefore justified in freeing themselves from the Divine ordinance. If we knew when definitely we were to die, it would still he our duty, our strength being continued to us, to work up to the very last moment. That would be in the way of preparing for our change. So they should rather have thought of being called away from their ordinary work by Christ at his coming. They would thereby have saved themselves from much sinful; and disquieting speculation and intrusion into what did not concern them. When we work, and work with all the might of our nature, within our own proper sphere, we can have the accompaniment of quiet. We can have restlessness banished from our mind; and we can avoid the annoyance that comes from meddling with the affairs of others. When we work, too, with a diligent hand, we are put in a position of honorable independence. We do not need to be a burden upon others. We can eat our own bread, eat what we have earned by the sweat of our brow. To orderliness, then, in the form of attention to the duties of their worldly calling, with all the weight of the Lord"s authority, with all the charm of the Lord"s suasion, the preachers sought to bring back the few among the Thessalonians who had been disorderly.

VI THE CHURCH ADDRESSED AS RIGHT MINDED. "But ye, brethren, be not weary in well doing." From the way in which the Church is addressed, it can be seen that the right minded from their numbers were properly representative. From the context, "well doing" is to be understood in its less restricted sense. Those were doing well, in honouring the Lord"s appointment of labour. The position in which they were placed was trying. It was hard for them to work on amid all the excitement that prevailed, especially if they themselves had the impression that the coming was impending. What need was there for work, when a new order of things was being introduced? Was it not more commendable to lay down their tools and devoutly wait for the heavens being opened over them? By this unsettling influence some of their number had been carried away. And the position of matters was aggravated by the support of these unprofitable members being thrown upon the Church. All the more honour, then, to them, the right minded, that, amid temptation, they held to the old order, that they thought it the right thing to labour on diligenty, till they actually heard their Lord"s voice on earth commanding them to cease from labour. Let them not weary in following an upright course. When an upright man sees his unscrupulous neighbours taking many an advantage which in his conscience he is not free to take, he is tempted to ask what advantage there is in uprightness. But, though the disadvantages were a hundred times greater than they really are, it would still be our duty to follow the Divine leadings. Let us not weary in the path that leads to God and life. There is nothing that is in the end wearying and wearing out but a mind that is conscious of wrong doing.

VII FURTHER SPECIFICATION OF THE COURSE TO BE FOLLOWED WITH THE DISORDERLY BROTHER. "And if any man obeyeth not our word by this Epistle, note that man, that ye have no company with him, to the end that he may be ashamed." The right minded being numerous could act in the name of the Church. The disorderly brother could be called before them, or before a court representative of the Lord"s authority in the Church. In some way his attention was to be specially directed to the part of the letter which pertained to him. And obedience was to be demanded of him to what was laid down in the letter. The ground was taken from under the position he occupied by the announcement that the coming was to be preceded by an apostasy and the revelation of the man of sin. That put the coming into the distance, and gave an aspect of stability to the old order of things, including the six days" labour of the fourth commandment. But it was not easy to get rid of all the false excitement at once. And the habit of idleness had to be overcome, so far as it had been formed. Against these hindrances the authority of the teachers was to be brought to bear. If after trial he persisted in neglecting to work, then the course to be followed was to note that man, and have no company with him. He was to be dealt with even as others who are mentioned in l Corinthians 5: "But now I write unto you not to keep company if any man that is named a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such a one, no, not to eat." The idler among them was to be a marked man, even as the greater offender; the whole sentiment of the Church was to be brought to bear against his idleness. They were not to have free intercourse or companionship with him. They were not to admit him into their privacy. They were not to invite him to their houses, to contribute to his support, or in any way to show him countenance in his disorderly course. They were to do this with a disciplinary end in view, viz. to shame him out of his idleness. It was a shame for a man, being able-bodied, to be idle and to throw himself as a burden upon others. It was especially a shame in a Christian, who was surely not to be behind his heathen neighbour in the ordinary duties of life. By producing in him a feeling of shame his amendment would be secured. Caution to be observed. "And yet count him not as an enemy, but admonish him as a brother." They were not to take the extreme step of cutting him off altogether from Church fellowship. He was not hopelessly removed from good. There was nothing decisive against the reality of his Christianity. They were therefore, while withdrawing from him, to acknowledge him as a brother, giving him to feel that, on returning to orderliness, they would welcome him back to freedom of Christian intercourse. There is a rule laid down here for our guidance in Christian intercourse. We are only to have free intercourse with those who are at one with us in the great essentials of the Christian faith and life. We are not to be on easy terms with those of whose sentiments, or of whose mode of life, we cannot approve. That would be to tolerate their sentiments, to tolerate their conduct, and thus to compromise our position and open up the way for our own deterioration. It would also be to encourage them in their position and prevent their amendment. Our duty is to withdraw from them, so far as it is necessary to conserve our own position, and so far as it is necessary to convince them that we do not countenance them in their position. But we are not to go to the extreme of bearing ourselves toward them as though they did not belong to the Christian circle. We are not to treat them as enemies. But we are to perform toward them the brotherly duty of trying to remove sin from them, so as to open up the way for the restoration of all suitable Christian intercourse. It is to be feared that many Christians are not sufficiently careful as to those with whom they freely associate. They look to position, to convenience, to companionableness, to sympathy in smaller matters, and not so much as they should do to the great ends of intercourse. There are even those belonging to the Christian circle against whose ideas and conduct it is necessary for us to protest. When they are habitually worldly, or unsettling, or uncharitable, or unbrotherly in conversation, or given to intemperance, even as we love the order which Christ approves, and as we would not be partakers with them in their sins, we must withdraw from them, while not, in moral cowardice, shirking the duty of speaking out what we think and admonishing them for their good. R.F.

The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

That walketh disorderly - Particularly by not working. Not according to the tradition he received of us - The admonition we gave, both by word of mouth, and in our former epistle.

John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.

A warning against disorderly conduct, with Paul’s example of right living:

v. 6. Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly, and not after the tradition which he received of us.

v. 7. For yourselves know how ye ought to follow us; for we behaved not ourselves disorderly among you,

v. 8. neither did we eat any man’s bread for naught, but wrought with labor and travail night and day that we might not be chargeable to any of you;

v. 9. not because we have not power, but to make ourselves an ensample unto you to follow us.

v. 10. For even when we were with you, this we commanded you, that if any would not work, neither should he eat.

v. 11. For we hear that there are some which walk among you disorderly, working not at all, but are busybodies.

v. 12. Now them that are such we command and exhort by our Lord Jesus Christ that with quietness they work, and eat their own bread.

The apostle has fully characterized the members of the Christian congregations as they should be. That he was not offering his own personal suggestions and opinions appears from the crisp sentence which he here inserts: But we charge you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ to withdraw yourselves from every brother walking disorderly and not according to the instruction which you received from us. It is a serious matter which Paul has broached and one which his tone brings out very sharply. The name, the honor of the Lord Jesus Christ Himself demand this form of procedure. If there is any brother, any person that has joined the congregation and wishes to be considered a member, but nevertheless conducts himself without any regard to the order established by the will of the Lord, ignoring the plain rules of conduct which the instruction of Paul had conveyed to them all, then the faithful members should withdraw from him, they should signify to him that fellowship with him must cease unless he returns to his senses and signifies his intention of observing the rules of life which obtain in the Christian Church by the will of God. Church discipline, as prescribed in Mat 18:1-35, must be applied in all cases of deliberate disorderly conduct, of willful disregard of the plainly expressed will of God, especially in cases of flagrant sins and vices, 1Co 5:11. In this case the apostle had in mind chiefly the refusal to work, to perform the labor demanded by every man’s temporal calling, as the context shows.

This thought is brought out by the apostle’s reference to his own example: For yourselves know how you ought to imitate us, for we did not walk disorderly among you, nor did we eat bread with any one for nothing, but in toil and misery, working night and day, that we might not be burdensome to any of you; not that we did not have the power, but that we might present ourselves a pattern to you to imitate us. Paul’s manner of life and conduct in the midst of the Thessalonians was a matter of common knowledge; he had hidden nothing from them, he had not loafed nor conducted himself disorderly in any manner. He had not sought free meals, he had not depended upon them for his subsistence. It was the special boast of St. Paul, for which he adduces a reason also in this instance, that he wanted to make his way, earn his own living, while preaching the Gospel in any city. He had therefore probably, in Thessalonica as he had done in other cities, practiced his trade as tent-maker, working at such times as he could not reach the people with preaching. It was a hard life, as he himself says, one full of hard toil and misery, a life which kept him busy practically night and day. But his object was attained, he was not a burden to a single member of the congregation. But here the apostle is careful to meet a probable misunderstanding which might harm the work of other teachers that could not possibly follow his method of double work. He did all this, not because he would not have had authority and power to demand the means of subsistence, a decent livelihood, from them, but because he felt that their circumstances required just such an example and pattern as he was setting them. He could and did frankly and unhesitatingly ask the Thessalonians to imitate him in this respect. His conduct could serve as a lesson to them, which they would do well to heed; he wanted to train them by his own example. See 1Co 9:7-15.

This feature of the Thessalonian character had struck the attention of the apostle even when he was laboring in their midst: For even when we were with you, this charge we gave to you, that if any one does not want to work, neither shall he eat. For we hear of some of you walking disorderly, in no way busy with work, but busybodies. But to such we give the charge and exhort them in the Lord Jesus Christ that, working with quietness, they should eat their own bread. God wants no idleness, He commands every man to eat his bread in the sweat of his face, Gen 3:19. A man that is persistently idle, that refuses to work, should therefore also be excluded from the legitimate fruit of labor, the food necessary to sustain the body. In addition to this general principle, however, which the apostle had taught during his stay among them, the present situation, from the reports which reached him, made it necessary to repeat his charge with emphasis. The life of the idler, of the loafer, is disorderly. And let no man come with the feeble rejoinder that all work and no play makes Jack a dull boy; for at the present time the underproduction of the necessities of life is largely due to the steadily diminishing number of working-hours, a number altogether out of proportion to the hours devoted to relaxation and recuperation. There is today, as it was in Thessalonica, too much idleness, and the devil finds work for idle hands to do. A little more thought for the welfare of the country as a whole and a little less thought of supposed personal convenience is very necessary at this time. Instead of being busily engaged in the work of their calling and devoting the energy of their thoughts to producing the best that is in them, too many people are busybodies, officious meddlers, fussy interferers. The charge of St. Paul therefore rings out today with the same force which characterized his earnestness in the first century. He is still charging and exhorting all men, especially all believers, in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, to attend to their work with all quietness and earn their maintenance honestly. Faithful and diligent labor, under the blessing of God, will always bring the necessities of life. Note: In our days also busybodies, impertinent meddlers with other people’s business, newsmongers and telltales, are an abominable race, "the curse of every neighborhood where they live, and a pest to religious society. " The words of the apostle with regard to such may well be transcribed by stating that every person should keep two points in mind so far as temporal affairs are concerned: first, to mind his own business; secondly, not to interfere with that of the other person.

Paul E. Kretzmann, Popular Commentary of the Bible (1921–1924) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Our apostle here enters upon a new subject, namely, that of such discipline; not only exhorting, but commanding and requiring them to excommunicate from their society every brother or Christian professor walking disorderly, and not after the tradition or doctrine delivered by him against such persons.

Note here, 1. That though the apostle did oftentimes entreat and beseech, yet he had authority to enjoin and command; We command you, brethern.

Note, 2. That this authority to command he had not of himself, but from Christ; We command you in the name of the Lord Jesus. A minister must look that his commands be grounded upon the authority of Christ, or else they will lie with small weight upon the consciences of his people.

Note, 3. The special duty he commanded them to the practice and performance of, namely, to excomminicate scandalous and disorderly persons from their communion and familiar society; That ye withdraw yourselves. A man that is guilty of a notorious, scandalous sin, ought to be suspended from familiar converse and society with the saints, to shame him into repentance, before a public declarative excommunication casts him out of the church; We command you to withdraw yourself from every brother.

Note, 4. The offended described, a brother: that is, a professor of Christianity, be he who he will, and let his rank and station be what it will, if he walks disorderly, like a soldier that keeps not rank and file, as the word signifies; if he walks not after the tradition which he has received of us, that is, plainly according to the rule and direction of the gospel, let him be avoided.

Hence learn, That there is no church member, whose rank and station, whose quality and condition, doth exempt his disorderly, scandalous walking from ecclesiastical censure: Withdraw from every brother that walketh disorderly.

William Burkitt's Expository Notes on the New Testament (1700–1703) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

ARGUMENT 8

CHURCH DISCIPLINE

6. “I command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you withdraw from every brother that walketh disorderly, and not according to the instruction which he received from us.” One rotten potato will rot a whole barrel. “Truly, the children of this world are wiser in their generation than the children of light.” If we did not separate the rotten from the sound, all of our fruits and vegetables would rot in a pile. How sadly this was verified in the Churches! One dancing damsel will lead all of the young people into Satan’s fandangos. No wonder so many Churches are rotten masses of spiritual putrefaction. The forfeiture of disciplinary power is the saddest phenomenon of the age. It simply illustrates the deplorable fact that the popular Churches are past redemption. Luther, Wesley, and Bunyan tried it, and failed. They saved many individuals. But history is silent on the reclamation of a fallen Church. Bishop Key says that it easier for God to raise up a new one than resurrect a dead one. If all of the Churches in this city (Los Angeles, California) would obey this plain and positive commandment, it would bring a Pentecost on California. If one should try it alone, the excommunicated would simply unite with other Churches, and the effect on them for their salvation would be largely counteracted. I knew a Methodist Church where Judge J wore the bell, and presided over the Official Board. Still he was a notorious sinner, as all knew and frankly admitted. Revivals came and went, but could not touch him. He would feed and pay the preachers, and do everything but get religion. So eventually the Conference sent a simple-hearted little man to that circuit. On arrival, he began revivals, and went round his circuit like a fiery cyclone. When he got through, he turned and excommunicated all that did not get religion (that was in the olden time). He did not begin with the little folks, but walloped the big horse first of all. The excitement was intense. Many said, “The Church is ruined.” The stewards told the preacher he would starve, as Judge J collected more money than all the balance. He said he would rather starve for God, than fatten for the devil. The judge roared like a lion, and said he had spent his money freely for the Church, and they had treated him like a dog. So he went out with a rage, vociferating that he would never be a Methodist again. Other Churches had their eye on him. Three years roll away. Of course, his mad spell wore off. A revival of unusual power visits the Methodist Church. Many hard reprobates are gloriously saved. The revival runs about three months. Erelong the judge, who never entered the house since his expulsion, is seen in the vestibule. He comes on, and nightly gets a little nearer, till, to the surprise of all, he comes and falls full-length at the mourner’s bench. Night after night for two whole weeks he is heard groaning at the altar. Finally he comes through as a sunburst. I conversed with his widow (a paragon saint) after his death, about ten years subsequent to his conversion. She told me he passed out of the world in glorious triumph. She said she believed he would have been lost if they had not turned him out of the Church. He was not a bad man; had no evil habits. About all that could be said was, that he had no religion, and did not claim to have. He depended on the prayers of his wife, the preachers, and the good people to save him. But they turned him out. On the abatement of his wealth, he began to soliloquize, “Who cares for poor me? They have given me over to the devil” The simple fact is, Judge J has to do something for himself, or the devil will get him. Conviction seized him. He cried to God nigh and day, and doubtless is this moment playing on his golden harp.

William B. Godbey, Commentary on the New Testament (1896–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Now we command you [because confident, as we have just said, that you will obey], brethren [not the officers, but the whole church], in the name of [by the authority of] our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves from [abstain from your habitual fellowship with] every brother that walketh disorderly, and not after the tradition [Christian rules of life] which they received of us . [Paul does not specify any particular disorder, but the next verse shows that he had a special reference to parasitical idleness.]

J. W. McGarvey (with Philip Y. Pendleton), Commentaries on the New Testament (The Fourfold Gospel, 1914; Acts; and the epistles) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

6–10. Now we command you. He has (verse 4) expressed a belief that they will readily obey his commands. He now gives one. Brethren. The command is not directed to priest or presbyter, but to the whole church. Compare 1 Cor. 5:4, 5. Withdraw yourselves. Decline to receive as a brother longer. Exclude from fellowship. Every brother that walketh disorderly. This command applies to other disorderly walking also, but has a direct reference here to those who refused to work. Not after the tradition. The instructions received from us.

B. W. Johnson's The People's New Testament with Notes (1889–1891) — public domain. Electronic text from the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (CCEL) ThML edition.

General Information:

Paul gives the believers some final instructions about working and not being idle.

Now

Paul uses this word to mark a change in topic.

brothers

Here "brothers" means fellow Christians, including both men and women. AT: "brothers and sisters" (See: When Masculine Words Include Women)

in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ

"Name" here is a metonym for the person of Jesus Christ. AT: "as if our Lord Jesus Christ himself were speaking" (See: Metonymy)

our Lord

Here "our" refers to all believers. (See: Inclusive "We")

to imitate us

"to act the way that my fellow workers and I act"

We did not live among you as those who had no discipline

Paul uses a double negative to emphasize the positive. This can be stated as a positive. AT: "We lived among you as those who had much discipline" (See: Double Negatives)

we worked night and day

"we worked during the night and during the day." Here "night" and "day" are a merism and they mean "all the time." AT: "we worked all the time" (See: Merism)

in difficult labor and hardship

Paul emphasizes how hard his circumstances were. Difficult labor implies work that requires great effort. Hardship implies they endured pain and suffering. AT: "in very difficult circumstances" (See: Doublet)

We did this not because we have no authority. Instead, we did

Paul uses a double negative to emphasize the positive. This can be stated as a positive. AT: "We certainly have the right to receive food from you, but instead we worked for our food" (See: Double Negatives)

translationWords

brother

lord

Jesus

tradition

labor

burden

authority

unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.

6-15.] Dehortation from disorderly, idle habits of life. He had given a hint in this direction before, in the first Epistle (5:14, 15): he now speaks more plainly, doubtless because their restlessness and excitement concerning the παρουσία had been accompanied by an increase of such habits. His dissuading them from associating with such persons, seems to shew that the core of the Church (as Lün.) was as yet sound in this respect.

6.] παραγγέλλομεν δέ takes up the assurance of ver. 4, and tests its general form by a special command.

ἐν ὀνόμ. κ.τ.λ. strengthens the παραγγ., and does not belong to the following.

στέλλεσθαι] lit. ‘to take in, or shorten sail:’ ἱστία μὲν στείλαντο, θέσαν δʼ ἐν νηῒ μελαίνῃ, Il. α. 433: hence, to draw in or shorten, generally: πότερά σοι παῤῥησίᾳ | φράσω τὰ κεῖθεν, ἢ λόγον στειλώμεθα, Eur. Bacch. 625;—to conceal: ἐβουλεύετο μὲν στέλλεσθαι, οὐ μὴν ἠδύνατό γε κρύπτειν τὸ γεγονός, Polyb. Frag. hist. 39 (from Suidas, voc. στείλασθαι),—οὐ δυναμένων τὴν ἐκ τῆς συνηθείας καταξίωσιν στέλλεσθαι (‘cohibere consuetam reverentiam’), ib. viii. 22. 4. So here, ‘cohibere vos’—to keep yourselves from: see reff.: obviously without allusion as yet to any formal excommunication, but implying merely avoidance in intercourse and fellowship. The accusative is repeated before the infinitive, probably because the clause ἐν ὀνόμ., &c., intervenes.

The παράδοσις refers to the oral instruction which the Apostle had given them when he was present, and subsequently confirmed by writing (1Th 4:11, 1Th 4:12).

παρελάβοσαν] plural, as belonging to the πάντες implied in παντός; so in ἔβαν οἶκόνδε ἕκαστος.

On the form -οσαν, which is said to have been originally Macedonian, and thence is found in the Alexandrian (ἐσχάζοσαν, Lycophr. 21), Lobeck remarks (Phryn. p. 349), “ex modorum et temporum metaplasmis, quos conjunctim tractare solent dialectorum scriptores, nullus diutius viguit eo quo tertiæ aoristi secundi personæ plurales ad similitudinem verborum in μι traducuntur,—εἴδοσαν Niceph., ἐφεύροσαν Anna Comnena, μετήλθοσαν Nicet. (and παρήλθοσαν).” We have ἤλθοσαν ἔθνη, Psa 78:1; see other examples from LXX in Winer, edn. 6, § 13. 2. f.

Henry Alford, The Greek Testament (1849–1861) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

6. παραγγέλλομεν δὲ ὑμῖν κτλ. With a particle of transition (δε), the point prepared for in vv. 1-5 (especially παραγγέλλομε and ποιήσετ v. 4) is introduced, the responsibility of the majority in reference to the case of the idlers. The command (I 4:11 and 4:2) is addressed by a brother to brothers, and is based on the authority not of Paul but of Christ. The phrase “in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ” differs from “in the Lord Jesus Christ” (with which the idlers are indirectly commanded and exhorted in v. 12), and from “through the Lord Jesus” (I 4:2), in that it is not subjective “prompted by the indwelling name or person of the Lord Jesus Christ,” but objective, “with,” that is, “using” that name. By the actual naming of the name, Paul draws attention not only to the authoritative source of his injunction, but also to the responsibility which the recognition of that supreme authority entails.

στέλλεσθαι ὑμᾶς κτλ. The substance of the command is “that you hold aloof from (cf. I 4:3 ἀπέχεσθαι ὑμᾶς ἀπο) every brother who walks idly (or, with Rutherford, “not to be intimate with any of your number who is a loafer”) and not according to the deliverance which you have received from us.” The persons to be avoided are not enemies but brothers (v. 15). Their fault lies in the realm of conduct; they “walk” (cf. I 2:12, 4:1, 12), that is, “live” (Chrys.), “behave themselves” as idlers (ἀτάκτω). The reference in περιπατεῖν ἀτάκτω is to the refusal, on the part of a small fraction of the converts (v. 11 τινά) to work and earn their own living, and to the resultant idleness, want, and meddlesome demand for support from the church, which are mentioned in I 4:11-12 and warned against in I 5:14 (νουθετεῖτε τοὺς ἀτάκτου; cf. below, v. 15). As the adverbial clause μὴ κατὰ τὴν παράδοσιν κτλ, parallel to and explanatory of ἀτάκτω, intimates, this disobedient idleness was contrary to the express instruction given when Paul was with them (v. 10 and I 4:11 καθὼς παρηγγείλαμε) and reiterated in the first epistle (4:11-12; cf. 5:14).

On the phrase ἐν ὀνόματ, cf. 1Co 5:4, 1Co 6:11, Col 3:17, Eph 5:20, Act 16:18 Ign. Polyc. 5:1; also 1Co 1:10 (διὰ τοῦ ὀνόματο); on the meaning of the phrase, see Heitmüller, Im Namen Jesu, 1903, 73.—ἡμῶ after κυρίο is to be omitted with BD, et al., “as a likely interpolation” (Ell.).—στέλλεσθα it found several times in the Lxx but only once elsewhere in the N. T. (2Co 8:20). From the root meaning “set,” the further idea, “set one’s self for,” “prepare” (Sap. 7:14, 14:1, 2 Mac. 5:1), or “set one’s self from,” “withdraw” (cf. 3 Mac. 1:19, 4:11, and especially Mal 2:5 ἀπὸ προσώπου ὀνόματός μου στέλλεσθαι αὐτό in parallelism with φοβεῖσθα), is easily derived. The meaning, which is somewhat uncertain in 2Co 8:20, is clear here, “withdraw one’s self from,” “hold aloof from” = χωρίζεσθα (Theodoret), or ἀπέχεσθα (which is parallel to στέλλεσθα in Hippocrates, Vet. Med. 10, as quoted by Liddell and Scott); it differs little from ὑποστέλλειν ἑαυτό (Gal 2:12) and ὑποστέλλεσθα (cf. GF in 2Co 8:20). On the word, see Loesner, ad loc., and Wetstein on 2Co 8:20; also Mill on our passage. For the subject accusative ὑμᾶ resuming ὑμῖ, see Bl 72:5.—It has already been stated (see I 5:14) that ἀτάκτω may be either general “disorderly” or specific “idly.” That the specific sense is intended is evident from vv. 7-9 where ἡ παράδοσι is indirectly explained by the reference to Paul’s habitual industry (ἐργαζόμενο); from v. 10 where ἡ πάραδοσι as orally communicated by Paul is quoted: “if any one refuses to work (ἐργάζεσθα), he shall not eat”; and from v. 12 where ἀτάκτω is defined as μηδὲν ἐργαζομένου The fault is not idleness but deliberate, disobedient idleness. What was probable in I 4:11-12, 5:14 now becomes certain; the second epistle explains the first. D, et al., by reading περιπατοῦντος ἀτάκτω (as in v. 11) blunt the emphasis on the adverb. On μη, see BMT 485.—Precisely how much is involved in the command to the majority “to hold aloof from” the idle brethren is uncertain, even in the light of the further specifications in vv. 14-15. The idlers are deprived to some extent of freedom of association with the rest of the believers, though to μὴ συναναμίγνυσθα (v. 14) there is not added, as is the case with the incestuous person in 1Co 5:11, a μηδὲ συνεσθίει It is not Paul’s intention to exclude the idlers from the brotherhood, for he insists that the admonitions even to the recalcitrant among the idlers, being designed to make them ashamed of themselves and return to their work, be tempered with love (cf. Chrys.). Furthermore, the fact that στέλλεσθα, as interpreted in vv. 14-15, is an advance over νουθετεῖ (v. 15, I 5:14) and calls for a slightly severer attitude to the delinquents suggests that, in the interval between I and II, the idlers, influenced both by the belief that the day of the Lord was near and by the severity of the persecutions (vv. 1-5), had become more meddlesome and contumacious than at the time of writing I (see note on πράσσειν τὰ ἴδι I 4:11). It is evident that some of them persist in refusing to obey Paul’s orders as conveyed by letter (v. 14, I 5:27); and it is not improbable that some of the more excited idlers were responsible for the disquieting assertion that the day of the Lord is present (2:2).—Most recent editors prefer the excellently attested reading παρελάβοσα (אA), which is supported by ἐλάβοσα (D), and, with corrected orthography, by παρέλαβο (EKLP). On the other hand, this reading puts an emphasis upon the idlers which would lead one to expect in the sequel not αἴδατ (v. 7) but οἴδασι Hence παρελάβετ (BG, et al.), which fits both ὑμᾶ and οἴδατ, is the preferable reading, leaving παρελάβοσα (on the ending, see B. 21:3) to be explained either (1) as an emendation (Weiss, 57) in accord with the adjacent παντὸς ἀδελφου (Pesh et at. have παρέλαβ), or (2) as a scribal error arising from “an ocular confusion with — οσι (παράδοσι) in the corresponding place of the line above” (WH. App.2 172). For παρʼ ἡμῶν B reads ἀφʼ ἡμῶ (1Co 11:23); cf. G in I 2:13.

International Critical Commentary — older volumes (1896–1929), various authors — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Withdraw yourselves from [στελλεσθαι υμας απο] . Stellesqai, P o. In the active voice, to place, arrange, equip : in the middle voice, to provide for, take care. See 2Co 8:20. Here with ajpo from, to place one's self away from.

Disorderly [ατακτως] . This adverb, the verb ajtaktew, and the adjective ataktov are found only in Paul, and only in the Thessalonian Epistles. See on 1Th 5:14.

Marvin R. Vincent, Word Studies in the New Testament (1887–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.