I grew up with my Mema for quite a bit of my childhood. My Mema was what we call “old school.” She was raised on a dairy farm, worked 14-16 hours a day hard labor, and as the eldest child she took care of 9 brothers and sisters. She walked to school uphill, both ways, in daily and perpetual blizzards. I don’t know that I believe the last part of that, but she insisted it was true.
When Mema was 19 she got her Realtor® license and began to help buyers and sellers with one of their biggest life decisions ever. She was in the real estate industry for 36 years and was a Top Producer© until the year she died of colon cancer. I was privileged enough to hold her hand as she took her last breath and I watched her go to be with God in the fullness of her resurrected life. Truly amazing!
During the summers I would go with her when she held open houses. She put me to work at the age of 9 mowing yards, pulling weeds, and doing various odd jobs. If I broke something in oversight or carelessness then I paid for it with the money that I made. The adage she reiterated to me over and over was “Idle hands are the devils work shop.” I had absolutely no idea what she meant. I was too busy to ponder her words.
Eventually, and unfortunately, I became hard hearted and obstinate to her wisdom and I rebelled. In that rebellion I became idle. My greatest pleasure was, quite literally, doing nothing. I was a totally unproductive person whose greatest concern was himself. If I was ever in the presence of those who were adversarial to my lifestyle then I sought to tear them down. If others spoke about those who were adversarial to my lifestyle then I became a gossip and busy-body in an effort to tear them down. I was a burden to everyone. Idle hands and idle time manifested itself in evilness. I learned my Mema’s adage the hard way.
2 Thessalonians 3:6
Now we command you, brothers, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you keep away from any brother who is waking in idleness and not in accord with the tradition that you received from us.
This passage is used as another proof text to say that if a brother or sister is under “church discipline” (a very nebulous and abused formula for division, which I will address soon), or if members of the Body differ in doctrine, then one member (or members corporately) should sever the other member(s) from the community and fellowship. This bump in the night pretext is quickly dismantled once the context is observed. There is no need to strain one’s eyes to make out this particular verse.
First, let’s take a look at the charge laid against these people. Paul says this is a brother who “…is walking in idleness…” This is the first of 2 charges. What exactly is “…walking in idleness?” Other Bible translations will translate this as an “unruly” or “undisciplined” life. Young’s Literal Translation defines it as “disorderly.” The tense of “walking” is in the present, continuous. It is, literally, a constant mode of behavior. It could be translated “…is walking about.” To be “walking about” was a common idiom in the 1st century. This person is manifesting a pattern of life described as undisciplined, idle, or unruly.
The word “idle” can also be defined, as I’ve pointed out, as undisciplined or unruly. The word literally means to “play truant.” It occurs in the papyri to describe how an apprentice must make good on the days he has played truant from work. And so the charge laid against this brother in v.6 is, quite literally, a charge of persistent and perpetual truancy from working to support his self, which is the tradition received from the Apostles. A Roman adage of the time was “By doing nothing, men learn to do evil.” The Rabbis said “He who does not teach his son a trade, teaches him to be a thief.” This brings us to the second charge laid against this person.
This type of person was violating a tradition given to them by the Apostles themselves. What was the tradition that was being violated? In his first letter to the Thessalonians Paul says “…and to aspire to live quietly, and to mind your own affairs, and to work with your hands, as we instructed you” (4:11, emphasis mine). This is strikingly similar to the context of 2 Thessalonians 3:6, where in verse 12 Paul says “…work quietly and to earn their own living.” In v.12 of his first letter, connected to v.11 we’ve already looked at, Paul says “…so that you may walk properly before outsiders and be dependent on no one.” And in chapter 5, verse 14, Paul says “…we urge you, brothers, admonish the idle…” This was the traditions given the Apostles that was then handed to the Thessalonians, i.e. works with your hands, take care of yourselves so that you are a burden on no one and are above reproach with outsiders. To disobey the command, which was a tradition, was to shame the Church undergoing scrutiny and persecution by Jews (1 Thess. 2:14; 2 Thess. 1:5-7).
Paul’s instructions to the Thessalonians is to keep away from a person who is manifesting persistent and perpetual idleness, thus being a burden to their fellow brothers and sisters and simultaneously bringing shame and further persecution on the 1st century Church. The motive for this shunning is that the offender may be ashamed (v.14). He is to be warned (v.15) while being treated as a brother (v.15). This is a far cry from the 21st century excommunication mantra. There is nothing within the context that would lead us to believe that this offender was not welcomed to worship with his brothers and sisters or that he would be ostracized from the entire community.
Philosophical Queries:
Having looked at the context it becomes clear that 2 Thessalonians 3:6 (and 14-15) does not set a precedence for blanket excommunication or avoiding those placed under the nebulous “church discipline” dogma. I do, however, want to point out 2 philosophical considerations that are extremely germane to the topic -
First, since 2 Thessalonians 3:6 is incorrectly used to describe how the Church should treat a fellow child of God who is already under “church discipline,” then how can this person be kept away from and avoided? Wouldn’t such an exhortation be a moot point if the person was removed from the community and handed over to Satan?
Second, how do we strictly apply this precept today without partiality? This is something that must be dealt with exegetically, else those who tout this verse as a proof text have judged themselves hypocrites who judge with partiality and are erroneously condemning certain members in the Body of Christ. Consider what Paul says in 2 Thessalonians 3:14:
If anyone does not obey what we say in this letter, take note of that person, and have nothing to do with him that he may be ashamed.
Notice the pronoun “anyone.” Notice the sweeping “in this letter” set against the proof text of 3:6. Thus, if anyone is not obeying what Paul wrote in that letter then that person should be excommunicated, per the custom of today’s moonlight Exegetes who cast shadows on the wall. Let’s consider some of what Paul says:
- There is the most obvious one that we’ve been dealing with, i.e. idle people who refuse to work. Are the Church and its leaders consistent in their judgment and excommunication of those who are idle (v.6), are a burden (v.8), won’t work (v.9), is a busybody (v.10)? We should be looking for these people and removing them from the Church, correct?
- “Finally, brothers, pray for us, that the word of the Lord may speed ahead and be honored…” (3:1) How many of us are obeying what Paul commanded in 3:1, to pray for he and the other apostles that the word of the Lord may speed ahead and be honored as they fulfill Matthew 28:19? If this is not being taught from the pulpit, done in “life” groups, practiced in the home, and everywhere else for that matter, then leaders and laymen alike must be excommunicated and avoided.
- “Finally, brothers, pray for us…that we may be delivered from wicked and evil men” (3:2). How many of us are praying that Paul and the other apostles would be delivered from wicked and evil men, i.e. the Pharisees prophesied of by Christ in Matthew 23 and fulfilled in the Acts of the Apostles? If a person is not obeying what Paul wrote in that letter then that person needs to be excommunicated and avoided.
These are just 3 examples in 1 letter showing an inconsistency in exegesis and application. It is proof texting, with a pretext, out of context. The historical, social, and political context is altogether ignored. While it is true that there are timeless precepts within the pages of God’s holy, living, active, sharp and glorious Word, those precepts have been codified as formulaic, rigid dogmas apart from their proper Biblical place and are being wielded with brute force at blood bought souls who are slain in the wake and name of “church discipline.”
No matter a person’s personal thoughts on how “church discipline” should work within a global, corporate, and/or local Body of believers, 2 Thessalonians 3:6 (and 14-15) is not a proof text for severing the Body of Christ from each other over a doctrinal difference; nor is it a proof text to place someone under “church discipline.”
