In the beginning, God placed man in a beautiful garden to dress it and keep it (Gen. 2:15). However, after man chose to sin, he had to be kept from the garden (Gen. 3:22-24). The same Hebrew word—shamar–used in Genesis 2:15 to describe man’s duty to keep, watch, and preserve the garden is used in Genesis 3:24 to describe the cherubim and “flaming sword” guarding the way of the tree of life.

This is how it goes when sin enters our lives. Realms God has intended for peace and good relationships are lost in exchange for selfishness resulting in isolation. Because men fail to be on guard and keep that with which God has blessed them, a separation occurs between God and people (Isa. 59:1-2). Man is then barred from the blessings which were once his. Some men are so sinful that they must be guarded continually lest they reach out in selfishness, harm others, and take something that is not lawfully theirs. A man is to protect his wife and children, but sometimes in the case of a sinful man, his wife and children must be protected from him. Proverbs 20:1 says, “Wine is a mocker, strong drink is a brawler, and whoever is led astray by it is not wise.” How many homes have had their peace shattered by an alcoholic, abusive husband and father? This is the twisted, devastating effect of sin.

Sin, however, affects all of us (Rom. 3:23). One does not have to be a drunkard, nor a danger to one’s own family to be guilty before God. All the world stands guilty before the Holy One (Rom. 3:19). We are all separated from the tree of life. But the story is not over. God extends the hope of eternal life to us (Titus 3:7). God offers eternal life in a qualitative sense. Every soul will live somewhere forever; the question is whether that eternal existence will be one of blessing or punishment (Matt. 25:46). Eternal life, then, is eternal prosperity.

How do we get back to the tree of life? How do we retrieve that which has been lost? How can we be among the number of those blessed with healing who are among the tree of life in Revelation 22:1-4? We cannot on our own merits get back to that tree. In sin we are dead spiritually (Eph. 2:1, 5). We have no strength to save ourselves (Eph. 2:8; Rom. 5:6).

Throughout the Bible, the sword represents the justice of God (Psa. 7:12; Jer. 25:29; Ezek. 29:8; Rom. 13:4). The sword represents the death penalty for those guilty of sin. God’s justice demands penalty for sin—that penalty is death. Romans 6:23, says, “For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.” Jesus took the curse for us by his crucifixion (Gal. 3:13). In this way, God is just in punishing sin but can also justify us in the blood of His son (Rom. 3:26). In a sense, Jesus took the sword for us so that we might have access to the tree of life again. In Revelation 22, the throne of God and the Lamb is there with the tree of life (Rev. 22:1, 3).  Jesus is this lamb, who earlier in the book appears to take the scroll from Him who sat on the throne; the lyrics of a new song contain these words: “For you were slain, and have redeemed us to God by your blood” (Rev. 5:6-9).

Jesus is the only way back to the presence of God and the tree of life (John 14:6). Are your sins washed away in the blood of the Lamb (Acts 22:16)?

The is the second installment of a series on the command to withdraw from the disorderly in 2 Thessalonians 3:6. Last week, we ended by noting how we must learn to trust God’s wisdom in this matter. This article will focus on how withdrawal is a salvation issue, that is, it is a matter of spiritual life and death (1 Cor. 5:5).

Saving someone’s life is no easy, convenient matter. It takes energy, wisdom, and compassion. This is an oft-neglected command not because it is difficult to understand, but because it is difficult to administer. It has never been easy to follow this, but it is so essential to the health of the church. It certainly was easier for the church at Corinth to remain proud in their religion rather than dealing with the fornicator in their midst, but it was not what God wanted (1 Cor. 5:2). If one in the midst of the body of Christ persistently engages in a public sin without facing discipline, then others in the congregation will feel free to engage in open sin as well. If this attitude permeates a congregation long enough, returning to the Lord’s way may take the withdrawal of so many that a split in the congregation may occur as a result. It is best then to follow this command and nip each problem in the bud before the sinful influence spreads. The purity of the church is an oft-forgotten aim of withdrawal (1 Cor. 5:6); regardless of whether the disciplined person repents, the purity of the church will be maintained.

In regard to how quickly a congregation moves to the final phase of discipline in withdrawal, we have mentioned how Paul had already taken previous warning measures to correct this behavior at Thessalonica. In the first letter he again gave them a command to work and reminded them it was commanded when Paul was in Thessalonica (1 Thess. 4:11-12). He instructed all of the members of the Thessalonian congregation to “warn the unruly,” admonishing those who were behaving disorderly by not working. The first letter with these commands was read before all the members of the church (1 Thess. 5:27). Since those commands had continued to go unheeded by some at Thessalonica, Paul, by apostolic authority, gave a command for the final phase of discipline for these unruly members: withdraw from them. The term “church discipline” is a more general than the way many use it, associating it only with withdrawal. When any Christian admonishes another brother, it is church discipline; when elders confront members about sinful practices, it is church discipline; when a preacher delivers a sermon where he rebukes practices among those in the congregation (2 Tim. 4:2), it is church discipline. Withdrawal is the final phase of discipline: a punitive phase when the one out of step will not respond to verbal warnings. How fast a congregation moves to the final phases is matter of judgment that is not stipulated in scripture. The timeframe for the successive phases of discipline must fit the individual’s spiritual maturity, mental and emotional state, and responsiveness.

Many times, an improper application this command is due to an overall misunderstanding of the church. Some have the false idea that there are saved people outside of the Lord’s church. Withdrawal is not excluding someone from a club because we think we are better than them. No, it is an attempt to save their soul (1 Cor. 5:5). There should be no distinction manufactured between the saved and the church; if one is not fit for church membership it is because one is in a lost state (Acts 2:47). If genuine repentance takes place, then God has mandated that the church accept the person back with the full blessings of brotherly love (2 Cor. 2:5-11); to continue to withhold fellowship from him is wholly contrary to the Lord’s commands.

Since God identifies the church as the saved, it does us no good to swell in numbers of people who are not saved by failing to practice church discipline. Next week, we will look at the command to withdrawal and numbers.

By apostolic authority, Paul wrote, “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” (2 Thess. 3:6). How many congregations today take this command seriously? How many actually practice it consistently? In this series of articles, let us look at the application of this command.

While the command to withdraw must be obeyed by all congregations of the Lord regardless of their culture and place in history, the anticipated effectiveness of this policy at Thessalonica is interesting to notice. In first-century Thessalonica, a distinctive feature of Christianity was its radical sense of community. Today’s church should strive to have this same sense of community. Disorderly members at Thessalonica from whom fellowship was withdrawn would sense an immediate threat to their own sense of belonging. They exchanged the loyalty to their own flesh and blood for a commitment to this spiritual family, the church. They would think twice about turning their back on their church family for it was the only sort of family they had. Sadly, the church in America in our day frequently does not possess this sort of close-knit fellowship. A lack of fellowship does not render withdrawal inappropriate, but it may make it ineffective. Perfect fellowship is not a prerequisite for carrying out the command of 2 Thessalonians 3:6. Fellowship was not perfect at Thessalonica, but withdrawal was still commanded. However, the better the fellowship, the more likely an erring individual will be swayed by withdrawal. The blessings of a strong sense of community are manifold, one of which is the desperation felt by him from whom the Christian community withdraws, a desperation that will hopefully drive him back to the Lord’s way and the Lord’s people.

Church discipline is rarely convenient, but it is the Lord’s directive. Withdrawal of fellowship is the last step of church discipline. In his prev

ious epistle, Paul commanded the Thessalonians to work (1 Thess. 4:11) and to warn the unruly who were not working (1 Thess. 5:14). Apparently, some continued to be unruly, that is, to walk disorderly and sponge off others for their necessities even after they had been reprimanded. So, in this second letter, he gives more attention to this problem. When verbal discipline will not turn one to the right way, a final step of withdrawal is then commanded by the Lord (Mt. 18:17). Paul, with apostolic authority, commanded Christians to do this “in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ” (2 Thess. 3:6-12).

This command is sometimes called “the forgotten command” among churches of Christ. While it might have been abused in bygone years, it is rarely practiced today. Some elders are afraid to implement it because they have seen withdrawal letters posted to social media and the backlash that has followed when other congregations have attempted to practice it. Another concern that has gripped the church is the legal ramifications that may come from implementing this divine injunction. Yet, fear of backlash does not give grounds for disregarding this command. The bottom line is, when it comes to carrying out this command, (or any of our Lord’s commands for that matter), we should look up to God, rather than looking around to see which way the wind is blowing. Next week, we will consider how carrying out this command is a salvation issue.