Paul commends the Thessalonians for their "perseverance and faith" (2 Thessalonians 1:4) and exhorts them to continue to follow the Lord without growing weary (2 Thessalonians 2:15; 3:13). Woven into his exhortations are his prayers to God for them. He prays that God would "comfort and strengthen their hearts in every good work" (2 Thessalonians 2:17). He prays that God would powerfully fulfill their every good desire and faithful work (2 Thessalonians 1:11). And he prays that God will grant them peace in any and every circumstance they encounter (2 Thessalonians 3:16). 

Paul reminds them that God has already demonstrated His love for them and has given them an eternal comfort and a good hope by His grace (2 Thessalonians 2:16). It is in light of this grace that God would continue to comfort, strengthen and fulfill every good work in them. And it is to this end that God would give this grace, namely, that Jesus would be glorified in them and they in him (2 Thessalonians 1:12). 

Friends, this promise is to us as it was to the believers in Thessalonica. We have received this same grace, and God will comfort and strengthen us and will fulfill every good work in us. And He will give us His peace as we face every challenge and difficulty and circumstance, so that the Lord Jesus Christ may be glorified in us and we in Him. Therefore, my friends, do not be weary in doing good and persevere in your faith.

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.15 Yet do not regard him as an enemy, but admonish him as a brother (2 Thessalonians 3:14-15).

Paul tells the Thessalonian believers to break fellowship with believers that refuse to obey his instructions to them, specifically, the instruction to work for their keep. Notice that Paul does not simply tell them to overlook their infraction and forgive them. They are to "admonish" them, and presumably they are to keep doing so until they right their wrong. 

Paul gave a similar instruction to the Corinthian church with respect to a certain incestuous believer:

But now I am writing to you that you must not associate with anyone who claims to be a brother or sister but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolateror slanderer, a drunkard or swindler. Do not even eat with such people (1 Corinthians 5:11).

Paul adamantly commands against friendly fellowship with believers, who flagarantly live in sin. Now, was Paul only writing to the church body and not to individual believers? Would it have been appropriate for individual believers to fellowship with this sinful brother as long as it was not a whole church gathering? Of course not! 

So why do some ministers today still insist that believers forgive and accept one another when there is no repentance? Jesus taught,

So watch yourselves. If your brother or sister sins against you, rebuke them; and if they repent, forgive them (Luke 17:3).

Did Jesus mean that if we rebuke our brother and this brother does not repent, we ought to just say, "I tried but he will not repent, so I should forgive him anyway"? Not at all! Jesus did not say, "Forgive anyway." When we teach unconditional forgiveness, are we not distorting the Scriptures? Even more clearly than in Luke, Jesus taught us what we are to do with respect to an unrepentant brother:

If your brother or sister sins, go and point out their fault, just between the two of you. If they listen to you, you have won them over. But if they will not listen, take one or two others along, so that ‘every matter may be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses.’ If they still refuse to listen, tell it to the church; and if they refuse to listen even to the church, treat them as you would a pagan or a tax collector (Matthew 18:15-17).

Jesus commanded continual rebuke until repentance. If there was still no repentance, the final straw was not unconditional forgiveness but rather removal from fellowship, that is, that every believer should stop associating with the sinful, unrepentant brother. 

Now, that being said, this does not excuse believers from praying for this brother. For even Jesus prayed for those that crucified Him. He prayed, "Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing" (Luke 23:34). Now, admittedly, Jesus was praying for unbelievers, and the instruction for believers with respect to unbelievers was different from the instruction for believers with respect to believers. For example, Paul writes,

What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside? God will judge those outside. “Expel the wicked person from among you (1 Corinthians 5:12-13).

As Jesus did, and as the martyr Stephen would also do, prayer was made to the Father for the murderous, unbelieving crowd of people. In other words, the unbelievers were given over to God for judgment, whether for ultimate forgiveness or for wrath.

Now, Jesus taught that the unrepentant brother should be treated like an unbeliever if they persist in unrepentance. If we are commanded to pray for unbelievers that sin against us, should we not do as much for our believing brothers? Yes, indeed. Wasn't this the reason Paul also told the Thessalonian believers, while disassociating from the unruly brother, they were, nevertheless, not to treat him like an enemy (cf. 2 Thessalonians 3:15). Consider also Paul's instruction to the Galatian church regarding sinful brothers:

Brothers and sisters, if someone is caught in a sin, you who live by the Spirit should restore that person gently (Galatians 6:1).

What is more, it is highly likely that the very brother that Paul commanded ouster from the church in 1 Corinthians 5 was the same brother that he commanded restoration in 2 Corinthians 2:

If anyone has caused grief, he has not so much grieved me as he has grieved all of you to some extent—not to put it too severely. The punishment inflicted on him by the majority is sufficient. Now instead, you ought to forgive and comfort him, so that he will not be overwhelmed by excessive sorrow. I urge you, therefore, to reaffirm your love for him (2 Corinthians 2:5-8). 

It appears that the sinful brother, having been separated from his church fellowship, experienced "sorrow" for his sin. In other words, it appears this brother repented of his sin. In view of this repentance, Paul commanded the Corinthian believers to forgive, comfort, and reaffirm their love for him. 

Friends, there are a number of other passages that simply speak of "forgiveness" without explanation. Ministers have wrongly concluded from these passages that Jesus taught unconditional forgiveness. These ministers have chosen to use a faulty and backward hermeneutic; that is, developing their doctrine from obscure passages while ignoring the clear ones, some of which I have presented above. Shunning simple exposition of the text, some ministers have been taken by the emotional appeal of secular psychology, which argues for the "healing" affect of unconditional forgiveness. But by this same token it could be argued that refusing to feel guilty over sin could be just as emotionally healing for the person committing the sin. Yet, who would support such a proposition?! 

Now, someone might argue, a person must forgive to be free from bitterness. Who says so?! If this is the case, God would be the most bitter of us all. But if God is not bitter, neither do we need to be bitter toward unrepentant believers that sin against us. As someone has correctly said, "We are commanded to love one another but not necessarily to like each other." Can we love those we don't like? Of course, for how else can we obey the command to love our enemies? How can we do what Paul commands here?

Do not take revenge, my dear friends, but leave room for God’s wrath, for it is written: “It is mine to avenge; I will repay,” says the Lord. On the contrary:

“If your enemy is hungry, feed him;
    if he is thirsty, give him something to drink.
In doing this, you will heap burning coals on his head.”

Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good (Romans 12:19-21).

Now, we do not wish God's final judgment on anyone, for we know that apart from God's grace, we ourselves would have experienced the same fate. If we have a right understanding of God's aweful justice in judgment, we would not be bitter toward anyone, no matter what they have done to us. Instead, we would pray for God's forgiveness of them and His enlightenment, for surely they persist in their sin out of ignorance of the truth:

Opponents must be gently instructed, in the hope that God will grant them repentance leading them to a knowledge of the truth, and that they will come to their senses and escape from the trap of the devil, who has taken them captive to do his will (2 Timothy 2:25-26).

Friends, for some of you, this topic is both personal and deeply emotional. But I urge you not to allow your very personal experience to cloud a correct understanding of God's truth. 

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 (1 Thessalonians 3:6). 

Paul tells believers to "keep away from" a fellow believer that "leads an unruly life". He will reiterate this a few verses later, writing, "Take special note of that person and do not associate with him" (1 Thessalonians 3:14).

What is the nature of this unruliness? It appears that these believers were simply mooching off the generosity of other believers rather than working to supply their own keep (cf. 1 Thessalonians 3:10-11). Paul commands such believers to work and pay for their own food (1 Thessalonians 3:12). 

Now, in the context of this rebuke, Paul provides insight into his own ministry:

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 (2 Thessalonians 3:7-9).

Paul tells the Thessalonians that he and his entourage worked for themselves while they were among them and paid for even the food that they ate. Even though they had the right to expect to be supplied this basic provision from those to whom they ministered, for Jesus allowed that it be so in the Gospels for those that He sent out (cf. Luke 10:7-8; 1 Corinthians 9:14), they did not avail themselves to even this basic provision. Why?

Paul tells these Thessalonian believers three times that he did this to give them an example to follow: "you ought to follow our example", "in order to offer ourselves as a model for you", "so that you would follow our example".

Now, I ask you, was this example meant simply for the unruly believers? No. If so, he would have spoken in the third person "they," as he did in referring to them in 1 Thessalonians 3:6 (cf. 3:11-12). But Paul uses the second person plural "you" to address all the believers in Thessalonica. That said, it appears that most of the Thessalonian believers were following Paul's example.

Now, what was this example that Paul desired all the believers in the Thessalonian church to follow? It was simply this: to work for their own keep. I believe this applies to members and leaders alike. While he may have had members in mind in this example, he addressed leaders in another text:

From Miletus he sent to Ephesus and called to him the elders of the church. And when they had come to him, he said to them,... I have coveted no one’s silver or gold or clothes. You yourselves know that these hands ministered to my own needs and to the men who were with me. 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 20:17-18,33-35).

The Lord allowed His disciples to receive provisions for their sustenance as they traveled from city to city proclaiming the Gospel. They were itinerant evangelists. He even told them not to take any money bags, for their purpose was not to earn money but to preach the Gospel. Paul and his entourage would qualify for such a benefit; however, he chose not to exercise this right (cf. 1 Corinthians 9:12,15,18). And everywhere he went, he encouraged the local congregations to follow his example, even to preach the Gospel for free and to work to supply the needs of the poor among them.

Paul gives a very clear reason why he preached the Gospel for free. He did not want money to hinder the preaching of the Gospel (cf. 1 Corinthians 9:12). Thus, Paul could never be accused of greed. He could never be accused of preaching for money. And he himself would not be enticed by money to compromise his mission or his message. 

Friends, ministers and churches today are categorically recognized today as greedy, preying upon the poor and the wealthy alike to serve whatever heights of comfort, luxury and grandiose ambition a church might aspire to achieve. 

I sometimes wonder, God could have made it so that Jesus was born in a palace rather than a manger. He could have been born to the greatest and most powerful family in the world of that day, and everyone the world over would have known Him in an instant. He could have advanced the technology of that day so that the news of the Messiah would spread instantly around the world. He could have put on grand displays before myriads of people in all parts of the world, so that a mass conversion would take place, like what happened with Elijah at Mount Carmel.

But He didn't. Instead the Scripture says,

For you know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that though He was rich, yet for your sake He became poor, so that you through His poverty might become rich (2 Corinthians 8:9).

I wonder if there is an example here for us to follow. I wonder if there is an example for ministers to follow. I wonder if there is an example for churches to follow. 

I wonder if our vision of the Christian mission is too short-sighted and narrow, for it is easy to see how wealth, advanced multimedia, and professional productions can quickly and widely spread the Gospel. Yet, I wonder if this method will prove to be short-lived, as attention moves from the message to the method and from the worth of the Person of Jesus to the worth of the production. 

The God who could have announced the birth of Jesus from heaven to every single person on the earth at the time instead chose to tell a few shepherds in Bethlehem. 

Friends, let's you and I not be too distressed by our lack of world reach. And let us not feel pressured to financially join some effort toward the same. But let us quietly and earnestly be witnesses where we are and with the platform God gives us. Let us not be too enamored by weath and luxury and fine productions. Let us be no "respecter of persons", showing no favoritism in justice, while exhorting the wealthy to be generous and the poor to be patient, and encouraging all to be faithful. 

God is just: He will pay back trouble to those who trouble you and give relief to you who are troubled, and to us as well. This will happen when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven in blazing fire with his powerful angels. He will punish those who do not know God and do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus. They will be punished with everlasting destruction and shut out from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his might on the day he comes to be glorified in his holy people and to be marveled at among all those who have believed. This includes you, because you believed our testimony to you (2 Thessalonians 1:6-10).

As often as Paul speaks of the love, mercy and grace of God, he also speaks of the judgment and wrath of God. He makes a contrast between believers and unbelievers. The unbelievers were "those who do not know God and do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus." These were the ones giving trouble to the church in Thessalonica. Paul writes that God would "pay back trouble" to them.

When would God do it? It would "happen when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven in blazing fire with his powerful angels." This speaks of God's final judgment, as detailed in the Book of Revelation.

Believers may wonder whether it is right to think such imprecatory (i.e. wishing divine judgment on others) thoughts. David did. Jesus did. Paul did. Peter did. God's judgment on unbelievers and the wicked are part and parcel with God's program for the ages. Now, we must remember that we too were at one time among them and that we were not saved because we were more righteous than they but simply because of God's elective grace. Nevertheless, we can acknowledge that God will judge those outside of this grace. And in view of the precedent set by David, Jesus, Paul and Peter, as well as others, we can be comforted in the midst of suffering caused by them in this life in part by a recognition of their terrible end. 

There is a line in a song by Carmen which says something like, "If the devil reminds us of our past, we just need to remind him of his future." In a similar vein, Paul writes, 

I consider that our present sufferings are not worth comparing with the glory that will be revealed in us (Romans 8:18).

Even the Lord Jesus looked ahead as a consolation to His earthly sufferings:

For the joy set before him he endured the cross, scorning its shame, and sat down at the right hand of the throne of God (Hebrews 12:2).

Friends, we in America really have nothing that comes close to what some Christians suffer for their faith. Our challenge is not so much endurance in the midst of suffering as the need for a renewed zeal out from the sludge of complacency. However, we have brothers and sisters in other parts of the world that are truly suffering. 

I am reminded of an Iraqi pastor, who has suffered for years in a Muslim prison for his faith. He recently received a retrial, only to be sentenced for more years in this prison. Being so incarcerated he has no means of supporting his family. As if personal suffering is hard, I'm sure it is even harder for him to see his family suffer. Our fellow laborers, H & V, who are working among the Kurds in Iraq, are doing what they can to help. Our brother, Stephen, has indicated that he would try to muster up support here. I hope all of us will join him to support this Iraqi pastor, who is filling up the measure of the sufferings of Christ in our stead. 

Friends, today, I would like to dispel a widepread misconception of a passage that I have also misused on many occasions. It is Hebrews 10:24-25,

And let us consider one another in order to stir up love and good works, not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as is the manner of some, but exhorting one another, and so much the more as you see the Day approaching.

In the past I joined with other pastors, teachers and most commentators in using these verses to argue that church attendance is commanded in Scripture. Recently, I have had a change of perspective. Let me give my two most compelling reasons for this:

First, the word translated "assembling ourselves together" is a form only used in one other passage of Scripture, namely 2 Thessalonians 2:1. Second, the context of both passages makes reference to the Day of the Lord. 

Now, brethren, concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him, we ask you, not to be soon shaken in mind or troubled, either by spirit or by word or by letter, as if from us, as though the day of Christ (2 Thessalonians 2:1-2).

Consider, then, this alternative translation for Hebrews 10:24-25 that brings it more in line with the usage in 2 Thessalonians:

And we should keep an eye on one another, provoking unto love and to good works; not turning our backs on our [coming] gathering together (as some do), but admonishing one another: And so much the more, as you see That Day approaching. 

In other words, without any other context to judge the meaning, just by parallel usage we ought to conclude that the meaning of "gathering together" is not weekly Sunday meetings, which, by the way, there is no definite evidence for in Scripture, but rather the gathering together to Christ at His coming. 

While I'm not arguing against weekly worship services, I would now challenge anyone who would try to argue for it as a biblical mandate using Hebrews 10:24-25. 

While the two reasons I've given above are compelling, there are more reasons in support of this perspective. While the noun form of the word translated "gathering together" is unique to these passages, the verb form can be found in the Gospels, where it can be understood as a general gathering together (Matthew 23:37; Mark 1:33; Luke 12:1; Luke 13:34) or with reference to the angels gathering together the elect in the Day of the LORD (Matthew 24:31; Mark 13:27). It is this latter usage that best fits the context of Hebrews 10:25.

Furthermore, just as the reference in Hebrews 10:25 to the "the Day" is universally understood to be the Day of the Lord, the immediate context, Hebrews 10:26ff, where we read about "a certain fearful expectation of judgment, and fiery indignation which will devour the adversaries," also has reference to the Day of the Lord. In the context preceding the passage we also find a reference to the end times: "from that time waiting till His enemies are made His footstool" (Hebrews 10:13). This gives further support to the idea that a final "gathering together" to Christ is in view and not weekly gatherings of the church.

So the expression "not forsaking our gathering together," or perhaps more clearly, "not turniing our backs on our [coming] gathering together" has the meaning that believers should not waiver in their faith in view of the coming gathering together to Christ, which is the resurrection hope of every believer. That is why a little later in this context we read,

Therefore do not cast away your confidence, which has great reward. For you have need of endurance, so that after you have done the will of God, you may receive the promise: 
      “ For yet a little while,
      And He who is coming will come and will not tarry.
      Now the just shall live by faith;
      But if anyone draws back,
      My soul has no pleasure in him” (Hebrews 10:35-38).

This exhortation was given because there were some among them that were turning their backs on this hope. That is why we read, "not turning our backs on our gathering together (as some do)." Who were they and in what sense were they turning their backs?

Consider the larger context of this passage, Hebrews 8-10, and even the whole book. The writer has been making a case that the New Covenant of grace in Christ was better than and has effectively replaced the Old Covenant of the Mosaic Law. In chapter 10:11 we read,

And every priest stands ministering daily and offering repeatedly the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins.  

In contrast to the Mosaic priestly system, which could never permanently take away sins, the New Covenant promises,

This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, says the LORD: I will put My laws into their hearts, and in their minds I will write them,” then He adds,“Their sins and their lawless deeds I will remember no more.” Now where there is remission of these, there is no longer an offering for sin (Hebrews 10:16-18).

So we see here both the inadequacy of the Old Covenant to take away sins and the sufficiency of the New  Covenant to forever take away all sins.

Then, in Hebrews 10:19-25 the writer takes a break from his analysis of the covenants to make a practical exhortation to believers to (1) boldly "draw near" to God with the full assurance that the blood of Jesus has taken away all their sins (Hebrews 10:19-22), (2) to "hold fast" to their hope, which is based on God, who is faithful to keep His promises (Hebrews 10:23), (3) and to "stir up" fellow believers in love and good works with the expectation of being gathered together to Christ in the Day of the Lord (Hebrews 10:24-25). 

After this aside, the writer returns to his primary thesis comparing the covenants:

For if we sin willfully after we have received the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, but a certain fearful expectation of judgment, and fiery indignation which will devour the adversaries. Anyone who has rejected Moses’ law dies without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses. Of how much worse punishment, do you suppose, will he be thought worthy who has trampled the Son of God underfoot, counted the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified a common thing, and insulted the Spirit of grace? (Hebrews 10:26-29).

The first verse, Hebrews 10:26, has been grossly misunderstood - mainly because, as elsewhere, it has been forcefully extracted from its context. So, some have tried to argue that Christians who sin "willfully" or "repeatedly" or "as a lifestyle" can never be saved. But this is to miss the writer's entire argument. Remember, he's contrasting the Old Covenant with the New Covenant. Notice that right before the temporary aside (i.e. Hebrews 10:19-25), we read in Hebrews 10:18,

Now where there is remission of these, there is no longer an offering for sin.

Then following the aside, notice how he uses the same language that he left off with in Hebrews 10:26,

For if we sin willfully after we have received the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins

Would the writer be directly nullifying his former declaration that "there is no longer an offering for sin," which is based on God's New Covenant of grace by a few verses later saying that if Christians sin willfully "there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins"? No, my friends. the writer is contrasting the "remission of sins" in Christ with the "willful sins" under the Law. He uses similar expressions to tie the two ideas together. But the former expression, "there is no longer any offering for sin" (verse 18), has the meaning that there is no longer any need for an offering for sin because Christ is sufficient.  The latter expression, "there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins" (verse 26), has the meaning that there are no sacrifices in the Law that covers willful sins. In the former you have an eternal hope in Christ. In the latter there is no hope for those who willfully break a command of the Law. 

The Old Covenant, which the Mosaic Law represents, had no provision for willful sins; that is, the entire sacrificial system was only designed to cover "unintentional sins." Intentional, or willful, sins were always judged either by restitution, dismemberment, or death. That is why the writer includes in verse 28, "Anyone who has rejected Moses' law dies without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses." By this, he is connecting verse 26 to the Mosaic Law. Hebrews 10:26 reads "we", but it is an editorial "we" (as also in Hebrews 2:3) and not a personal testimony, for the verse is not addressed to Christians but to those under the Old Covenant. This is confirmed by the writer's comment in Hebrews 10:39, "But we are not of those who draw back to perdition, but of those who believe to the saving of the soul."

To argue against Christians "willfully sinning" here would be to completely miss the point of the writer, who is contrasting the impossible provisions of the Mosaic Law, by which no one could be saved, to the Gospel of grace through the once-for-all sacrifice of Jesus Christ. The writer is saying that there was no hope under the former covenant, because any willful sin would render a person condemned. Now, if under the former covenant there was judgment for willful sins, the writer argues that those that reject the New Covenant in Christ would suffer an even greater judgment because the provisions of the New Covenant is greater than that of the Old Covenant (Hebrews 10:29-31).

The writer, therefore, exhorts believers, "Do not cast away your confidence [in the blood of Christ], which has great reward" (Hebrews 10:35). In contrast to those who must live by the works of the Law, the writer exhorts the believers to live by faith (Hebrews 10:38). While he makes all these exhortations, the writer gives the assurance: "But we are not of those who draw back to perdition, but of those who believe to the saving of the soul" (Hebrews 10:39). In other words, there is no chance that true Christians will draw back from faith, for, as argued elsewhere, their faith has been established by God. 

Friends,

We read in 2 Thessalonians 2:13-14

But we should always give thanks to God for you, brethren beloved by the Lord, because God has chosen you from the beginning for salvation through sanctification by the Spirit and faith in the truth. It was for this He called you through our gospel, that you may gain the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ.

Here we find another evidence of election: "God has chosen you from the beginning for salvation." Here also we find the two-fold means that we enter into what was predestined for us: "through sanctification by the Spirit" (that is, "new birth," cf. John 3), "and faith in the truth." Finally, we will enjoy the full benefit of salvation when we "gain the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ," that is, when our mortal bodies take on immortality and we become not only spiritually but also physically like Christ.