Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you keep away from every brother who leads an unruly life and not according to the tradition which you received from us. For you yourselves know how you ought to follow our example, because we did not act in an undisciplined manner among you, nor did we eat anyone’s bread without paying for it, but with labor and hardship we kept working night and day so that we would not be a burden to any of you; not because we do not have the right to this, but in order to offer ourselves as a model for you, so that you would follow our example. For even when we were with you, we used to give you this order: if anyone is not willing to work, then he is not to eat, either. For we hear that some among you are leading an undisciplined life, doing no work at all, but acting like busybodies. Now such persons we command and exhort in the Lord Jesus Christ to work in quiet fashion and eat their own bread. But as for you, brethren, do not grow weary of doing good. If anyone does not obey our instruction in this letter, take special note of that person and do not associate with him, so that he will be put to shame. Yet do not regard him as an enemy, but admonish him as a brother. (3:6–15)

As he so often does in his epistles Paul returns from the lofty heights of theological instruction (chaps. 1 and 2) to the basics of practical Christian living. For Paul, theology was not merely abstract reasoning, but practical truth to affect daily life. In this passage, he discusses the universally practical issue of work.

People from Paul’s day to the present have had a wrong view of work. In fact, our society proudly displays its skewed view of work on the back of its cars. “I owe, I owe, so off to work I go,” reads one bumper sticker, reflecting the view that work is a necessary evil; nothing more than a way to pay off debts and fund one’s lifestyle. Another, extolling the virtue of laziness, proclaims, “Work fascinates me—I can sit and watch it for hours.” License plate frames announce that people would rather be fishing, flying, RVing, golfing, skiing, sailing, hiking, camping, four wheeling—anything but working. In our materialistic, self-indulgent society, many people play at their work and work at their play. Others work only to achieve prosperity, success, fame, and early retirement.

Such perspectives rob work of any intrinsic value. In essentially valueless work, people display that disdain for the effort itself in doing only enough to avoid being fired, getting away with whatever cheating they can, considering long hours and hard work to be counterproductive, remaining loyal to their opportunity and employer only until they get what they perceive as a better, more lucrative opportunity, and in general showing utter indifference to the quality of their work.

Throughout history, cultures have denigrated the value of work. Even in Jewish thinking, doing menial labor was inferior to studying God’s law. One rabbi expressed that view in the following prayer:

Many cultured Greeks and Romans also viewed manual labor as beneath their dignity, fit only for slaves or the lower classes. Aristotle declared working as a craftsman or a trader to be “devoid of nobility and hostile to perfection of character” (cited in Ryken, 64). In a similar vein the Roman author Cicero wrote, “The toil of a hired worker, who is paid only for his toil and not for artistic skill, is unworthy of a free man and is sordid in character…. Trade on a small retail scale is also sordid” (cited in Ryken, 65).

A low view of work also found its way into the church. The church father Eusebius wrote,

For Eusebius, first-class Christians serve God alone; second-class Christians engage in secular employment. That dichotomy between secular and sacred occupations reached its full flower in the monasticism of the Middle Ages. It was not until the Reformation that Luther, Calvin, and the other Reformers restored work to its God-given place of dignity.

Like any other aspect of life, work viewed apart from God appears to have little value. In Ecclesiastes Solomon asked:

Seeing it from a purely human perspective, Solomon argued that work is futile:

It is only when work is viewed from God’s perspective that its value may be seen:

The Christian faith, however, does not accept any utilitarian work ethic. There is no such thing as a secular job for a Christian; all work is a spiritual duty to be done as an opportunity to give glory to God (1 Cor. 10:31). The Christian view of work affirms several truths.

First, God exalted work by commanding it. It is often ignored that the familiar fourth commandment not only prescribes the keeping of the Sabbath on the seventh day, but work on the other six (Ex. 20:9). That is God’s command as much as the day of rest. Its importance is clear from its inclusion in the Decalogue.

Second, God Himself sets the example of work for all to follow. God works in Creation (Gen. 1:1), preservation (Heb. 1:3), providence (1 Chron. 29:11), judgment (Acts 17:31), and redemption (Gal. 4:4–5). The Lord Jesus Christ is also working: by redeeming people (Gal. 3:13), building His church (Matt. 16:18), interceding for His people (Rom. 8:34), and preparing a place in heaven for them (John 14:1–3). Likewise, the Holy Spirit works by convicting sinners (John 16:8), regenerating them (Titus 3:5), and indwelling them (2 Tim. 1:14).

Third, work is a feature of the creation mandate and is therefore a normal part of man’s existence. The psalmist expressed that truth in Psalm 104:14: “He causes the grass to grow for the cattle, and vegetation for the labor of man, so that he may bring forth food from the earth.” That man should work to produce food is a part of the natural course of events: “Man goes forth to his work and to his labor until evening” (v. 23). Work is not a result of the curse, since God commanded Adam to work in the Garden before the Fall (Gen. 2:15). The Fall did not initiate work, but cursed it (Gen. 3:17–19), making it laborious and painful.

Fourth, work is a gift from God. Man’s occupation with it provides development of skill and productivity, significant contribution, value, meaning, and fulfillment in life. It also prevents idleness which, as clearly seen in the indolent of every society, is debilitating and destructive. It is well said that “idle hands are the devil’s workshop.” God also gave work to man as a means of demonstrating the image of God in him, who by work is providing for the needs of all in his care. God’s gift of work grants the satisfaction of serving the needs of other people.

Finally, the biblical work ethic affirms that all work can be elevated above the mundane by being done for the Lord Himself. In Ephesians 6:5–7 Paul commanded:

Some of the Thessalonian believers were not living consistently with this biblical view of work. They were causing strife in the church by refusing to work and leeching off the rest of the congregation. Paul does not reveal what their motives were. They may have been influenced by the prevailing Greek and Jewish views of work, noted above, and felt it was beneath their dignity. Perhaps they believed that since Christ could return at any moment, work was pointless. Or they may just have been lazy (the Bible condemns laziness in such passages as Prov. 10:26; 12:27; 15:19; 24:30–34). Paul did not mention their motives for failing to work because none of them are valid; there is no excuse for someone who has the ability and opportunity to work not to do so.

Since this was the third time that Paul had had to deal with this issue (3:10; 1 Thess. 4:11–12), he bluntly and directly confronts those who stubbornly refused to work. This passage contains six incentives to motivate those sinning to repent and get to work: disfellowship, example, survival, harmony, shame, and love.

DISFELLOWSHIP

Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you keep away from every brother who leads an unruly life and not according to the tradition which you received from us. (3:6)

Since those refusing to work had obstinately disregarded his instruction while he was there (3:10) and his exhortation in his first letter (4:11–12; 5:14), Paul here issued a stern command regarding them. The Greek verb translated we command is in the emphatic position in the sentence; Paul was not offering a suggestion, but issuing an order. This command was not based on his, Silas’s, and Timothy’s authority; it was issued in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ and carried the full weight of His authority. Therefore it was to be obeyed instantly and unquestioningly.

When Paul ordered the Thessalonians to keep away from every brother who refused to work he was commanding them to shun them. And there were to be no exceptions. As previously noted, there is no valid excuse for anyone who is able to work and has the opportunity to do so to be idle. The verb translated keep away is a form of the verb stellō which, when used in the middle voice, means, “to avoid,” “shun,” or “pull back from.” Paul commanded the rest of the congregation to separate from and ostracize every idle brother.

In the context of Matthew 18, this is the third step in the process of church discipline. Step one is to confront the sinning believer privately; step two is to confront him again with two or three witnesses present; step three is to tell the offense to the congregation and cut the offender off from the normal life of the church. For those who persist in sinning after the first three steps, step four is to remove them from the fellowship altogether (treat them as unbelievers; Matt. 18:17). Since a disciplined sinner was still to be regarded as a brother (cf. 3:15), this disfellowshiping stopped short of the complete and final (barring repentance) excommunication of step four.

Those who refused to work were placed in the category of those guilty of leading an unruly life. In a military sense, ataktos (unruly) refers to “being out of rank,” “out of line,” or “out of order.” It was also used in extrabiblical Greek writings to refer to apprentices being truant from work (William Barclay, The Letters to the Philippians, Colossians, and Thessalonians, rev. ed. [Louisville, Ky.: Westminster, 1975], 217–18). Paul described the unruly in verse 11 (the only other time the word appears in the New Testament) as “doing no work at all, but acting like busybodies.”

Such idle, lazy, out-of-line behavior was definitely not according to the tradition which the Thessalonians had received. As noted in the discussion of 2:15 in chapter 24 of this volume, tradition (lit., “something handed down”) refers to divine revelation given through the apostles. The concept of an extrabiblical body of tradition equal in authority to Scripture is foreign to the New Testament (cf. 2 Tim. 3:16–17). The inspired tradition they had received from Paul, both orally (3:10) and in writing (1 Thess. 4:11–12), forbade idleness. Therefore, those who refused to work were guilty of rejecting God’s Word.

That the indolent believers faced church discipline shows the seriousness with which God views failing to work. Since true believers cherish the fellowship of other believers, being cut off from it should be painful enough to effect a change in their behavior. The drastic step of church discipline was also necessary to protect the church’s reputation with outsiders. The world must also know that God does not tolerate indolence and laziness.

EXAMPLE

For you yourselves know how you ought to follow our example, because we did not act in an undisciplined manner among you, nor did we eat anyone’s bread without paying for it, but with labor and hardship we kept working night and day so that we would not be a burden to any of you; not because we do not have the right to this, but in order to offer ourselves as a model for you, so that you would follow our example. (3:7–9,)

The apostle Paul would have agreed wholeheartedly with the statement of the Puritan Thomas Brooks, “Example is the most powerful rhetoric” (cited in I. D. E. Thomas, A Puritan Golden Treasury [Carlisle, Penn.: Banner of Truth, 1977], 96). Therefore, he bracketed this section with the phrase you … follow our example. The Greek verb used in both instances is a form of the verb mimeomai; the related noun is the source of the English word mimic. Paul was an example for the Thessalonians to imitate because he himself imitated the Lord Jesus Christ (1 Cor. 11:1). He was a model of gospel preaching (1 Thess. 1:6), enduring suffering (2:2), honesty and integrity (2:3–5), humility (2:6), gentleness (2:7), affection (2:8), self-sacrifice (2:8), holiness (2:10), and prayer (3:10). Just as they followed his example in those areas (1:6), they needed to follow his example of hard work (2:9).

The phrase you yourselves know appeals to the Thessalonians’ firsthand knowledge of the missionaries’ exemplary behavior (cf. 1 Thess. 2:1; 3:3; 5:2; Acts 20:18, 34); they did not act in an undisciplined manner.

The Greek verb translated act in an undisciplined manner is related to the word translated “unruly” in verse 6 and “undisciplined” in verse 11. The missionaries’ industriousness was in sharp contrast to the lazy indolence of the idle members of the congregation. Reinforcing that contrast, Paul declared, Nor did we eat anyone’s bread without paying for it. The phrase to eat … bread refers metaphorically to food and sustenance (cf. Gen. 3:19; 43:32; Amos 7:12; Matt. 15:2; Luke 14:15). Though they apparently stayed at Jason’s house (Acts 17:7), the missionaries did not eat at his expense. They insisted on paying for their own food and perhaps their lodging; with strenuous labor and hardship they kept working night and day so that they would not be a burden to any of the Thessalonians—a truth the apostle had also reminded them of in his first epistle (1 Thess. 2:9; cf. Acts 20:34; 1 Cor. 4:12).

Paul made it clear that his reason for doing manual labor was not because he, Silas, and Timothy did not have the right to receive support for their intense work of preaching and teaching. He did not always forgo accepting support from the churches to which he ministered. In fact, the Philippians twice sent him a gift during his stay in Thessalonica (cf. Phil. 4:16), and he also received support from other churches while ministering in Corinth (2 Cor. 11:8–9). He particularly chose to work in Thessalonica so that those who refused to work could not point to his not working as justification for their idleness. Instead, the missionaries dignified work by offering themselves as a model for the believers to follow.

Paul plainly taught that as an apostle and preacher he was entitled to full support. In Galatians 6:6 he wrote, “The one who is taught the word is to share all good things with the one who teaches him.” He instructed Timothy that “the elders who rule well are to be considered worthy of double honor, especially those who work hard at preaching and teaching” (1 Tim. 5:17). But his most detailed exposition of that principle is in 1 Corinthians 9:3–14:

Paul began by asking a series of rhetorical questions, each demanding an affirmative answer. Just as he had a right to eat and drink (v. 4) and be married (v. 5), he also had a right to refrain from physical labor and give himself totally to the hard work of ministry (v. 6). The apostle then presented a series of analogies to further demonstrate his point (v. 7). Soldiers have a right to have their expenses paid; those who plant vineyards have a right to the fruit they produce; those who tend flocks have a right to what they produce. Using the proverbial illustration of an ox threshing grain, the Law teaches that those who minister are to be cared for (vv. 8–10). Those who pour their lives into ministering to, teaching, and nurturing others have the right to expect their support (vv. 11–14).

Since Paul humbly labored to meet his needs in addition to his ministry, how could anyone else justify not doing so? But despite all of Paul’s hard work to be a godly model for them, some still refused to work. For them, stern measures were in order.

SURVIVAL

For even when we were with you, we used to give you this order: if anyone is not willing to work, then he is not to eat, either. (3:10)

To the missionaries’ example, Paul added a pointed command. The divinely revealed, authoritative, axiomatic truth that those who are not willing to work are not to eat was not new to the saints. Ignorance was not their problem, for even when the missionaries were with them, they used to give them that order. Paul had also discussed this issue in his first epistle (4:11; 5:14). His point is simple: if people get hungry enough, they will work to get food. As Solomon put it, “A worker’s appetite works for him, for his hunger urges him on” (Prov. 16:26). Believers who have the opportunity and the ability to work for their own food are to do so. Those who do not are worse than unbelievers (1 Tim. 5:8).

It is important to note that Paul addresses here the issue of those not willing to work, not those unable to work. Both individual believers and the church as a whole have a responsibility to care for the poor (Matt. 6:2, 3; Gal. 2:10; 1 Tim. 5:4; Heb. 13:16; James 2:15–16; 1 John 3:17). But neither the world nor the church owes a living to those too lazy to work. We are used to “entitlements” in our society. This is the idea that those who will not work hard are entitled to be paid money taken from those who do. The results of the welfare culture are visible for all to see—family breakups, immorality, crime, hopelessness, meaninglessness, and bitterness.

HARMONY

For we hear that some among you are leading an undisciplined life, doing no work at all, but acting like busybodies. Now such persons we command and exhort in the Lord Jesus Christ to work in quiet fashion and eat their own bread. But as for you, brethren, do not grow weary of doing good. (3:11–13)

Word had come to Paul that despite his exhortations, both in person (3:10) and in writing (1 Thess. 4:11–12), some in the congregation were still unwilling to work. How he was able to hear about those leading an undisciplined life is not known, but somehow news of the continuing problem reached Corinth from Thessalonica. Ataktōs (undisciplined) is the same word translated “unruly” in verse 6. The undisciplined were doing no work at all, but acting like busybodies. There is a play on words in the Greek; Paul says they were not ergazomenous, but periergazomenous; “not busy, but busybodies.” Not content with refusing to work productively, they used their unoccupied time to wander around interfering in the lives of others in the church (cf. 1 Tim. 5:13). The nonworkers were an irritant, creating disunity and discord by being a burden on those who did work. That was beginning to affect the loving harmony and effective witness of the assembly of faith.

Now such persons, writes Paul, we strongly command and gently exhort in the Lord Jesus Christ to work in quiet fashion and eat their own bread. A corollary to the familiar Pauline concept of being in the Lord Jesus Christ (cf. Rom. 8:1; 16:3, 7; 1 Cor. 1:30; 2 Cor. 5:17) is the unity of those united with Him (Rom. 12:5; 1 Thess. 2:14). To preserve that precious unity, the indolent members of the flock were commanded to work in quiet fashion and eat their own bread. They were to settle down, stop meddling in other people’s affairs, and begin leading an ordered life of quiet, consistent work. By so doing they would cease being a burden and become a blessing, thereby promoting harmony in the church.

Paul encouraged the rest of the brethren who were faithfully working not to grow weary of doing good (cf. Gal. 6:9). The danger was that they would grow weary of the deadbeats and become indifferent to real needs. As noted above, God’s people must not ignore their responsibility to care for those in need. David wrote, “The righteous is gracious and gives…. All day long he is gracious and lends” (Ps. 37:21, 26). In Psalm 41:1 he added, “How blessed is he who considers the helpless” (cf. Ps. 112:9). Solomon was also aware of the need to care for the poor: “He who gives to the poor will never want, but he who shuts his eyes will have many curses” (Prov. 28:27). In Isaiah 58:7, God commends those who “divide [their] bread with the hungry and bring the homeless poor into the house.” In Luke 14:12–14 Jesus said,

Paul reminded the Ephesian elders, “In everything I showed you that by working hard in this manner you must help the weak and remember the words of the Lord Jesus, that He Himself said, ‘It is more blessed to give than to receive’” (Acts 20:35). The prescription for church unity was for the nonworkers to go to work, and for the entire congregation to care for those in genuine need. Obviously, this was directed at the men who had the responsibility to provide for their families, while the women kept the home (cf. Titus 2:3–5). Even young widows were to marry husbands who would rescue them from being busybodies (cf. 1 Tim. 5:11–14).

SHAME

If anyone does not obey our instruction in this letter, take special note of that person and do not associate with him, so that he will be put to shame. (3:14)

Since this was the third time Paul had dealt with this issue, anyone who still refused to obey his instruction in this letter was being sinfully obstinate. Therefore, he commanded the rest of the assembly to take special note of such a person. He was to be marked out for serious attention—the rest of the congregation was not to associate with him. The strong double compound verb sunanamignumi (associate with)

literally means, “to mix up together with.” The church individually and collectively was to withdraw fellowship from such persons and avoid them. They were probably to be denied the privilege of taking communion. Surely they were not to be allowed to participate in the love feast, since feeding them a meal would condone and perpetuate their indolent behavior. The pressure of isolation was to be brought to bear on them to produce repentance.

The purpose of this third step in the church discipline process (cf. the discussion of v. 6 above) is that those who refuse to work will be put to shame. The verb translated be put to shame is a form of the verb entrepō, which literally means, “to turn in on oneself.” The idea is that isolation from the fellowship would cause the sinning believers to reflect on their condition, see themselves for the wicked, recalcitrant sinners that they were, be ashamed, and change their behavior. The repentance and restoration of the sinning member is always the goal of church discipline.

LOVE

Yet do not regard him as an enemy, but admonish him as a brother. (3:15)

Since this is not yet the fourth and final stage of the discipline process, the faithful members of the assembly must not regard the one being disciplined as an enemy (cf. Matt. 18:17). Since he had not yet been put out of the fellowship (1 Cor. 5:2) and delivered to Satan (1 Cor. 5:5; 1 Tim. 1:20), the congregation was not yet to treat him “as a Gentile and a tax collector” (Matt. 18:17), but to admonish him as a brother.

This point provides a much-needed balance to the discipline process, noting that the motive for disciplining sinning believers is love. Galatians 6:1 gives the proper attitude for those engaged in the discipline process: “Brethren, even if anyone is caught in any trespass, you who are spiritual, restore such a one in a spirit of gentleness; each one looking to yourself, so that you too will not be tempted.”

Our culture’s work ethic has eroded, but the biblical work ethic remains constant. When Christians diligently pursue the vocation to which God has called them, God is honored. Therefore, “All who are under the yoke as slaves are to regard their own masters as worthy of all honor so that the name of God and our doctrine will not be spoken against” (1 Tim. 6:1).