1Τὸ λοιπὸν προσεύχεσθε, ἀδελφοί, περὶ ἡμῶν, ἵνα ὁ λόγος τοῦ κυρίου τρέχῃ καὶ δοξάζηται καθὼς καὶ πρὸς ὑμᾶς, 2καὶ ἵνα ῥυσθῶμεν ἀπὸ τῶν ἀτόπων καὶ πονηρῶν ἀνθρώπων· οὐ γὰρ πάντων ἡ πίστις.
At this point in the letter, following their prayer of petition in 2:16-17, the writers signal they are moving towards the conclusion with the adverbial accusative expression τὸ λοιπόν “for the rest.” This could mean “in the future, henceforth” or “finally, as far as the rest is concerned” (BDAG, 602). They used an anarthrous form in 1 Thess 4:1. Having just prayed for the believers, they give an instruction for the Christians in Thessalonika, namely “be praying for us.” This is a present middle imperative, second person plural. The preposition περί marks the persons for whom prayer is being offered. The vocative ἀδελφοί is another indication of a new topic.
The writers use two ἵνα clauses defining the substance of the prayers requested. In my opinion these are indirect commands expressed as prayer petitions. In the first clause the writers place the subject first, giving it prominence. The noun phrase ὁ λόγος τοῦ κυρίου occurs in 1 Thess 1:8 and there refers to the gospel message. They employ an anarthrous form of this phrase in 1 Thess 4:15 to refer either to some part of Jesus’ teaching or to a subsequent prophetic word received from the Lord Jesus. A plural form occurs in 1 Tim 6:3 that seems to refer to various, discrete teachings that Jesus offered concerning various themes. It is coupled with the noun τῇ διδασκαλίᾳ. Paul employs the phrase ὁ λόγος τοῦ Χριστοῦ in Col 3:16. See also Acts 13:49 and 20:35. Probably the genitive is objective, i.e., “the message about the Lord (Jesus).” In other contexts Paul speaks of ὁ λόγος τοῦ θεοῦ. Consider the usage in 2 Thess 3:14 where λόγος has the sense “rule or principle.” However, in 3:1 the focus is upon the gospel message.
The collocation of the verb τρέχω with λόγος is unusual, but does occur in Odes 147.5 (ἕως τάχους δραμεῖται ὁ λόγος αὐτοῦ) to describe the speed with which Yahweh’s word is accomplished. Philo (Quis rerum divinarum heres sit 201.3) marvels at τὸν μετὰ σπουδῆς ἀπνευστὶ δραμόντα συντόνως ἱερὸν λόγον (“that sacred Word, which ran in impetuous breathless haste…” (Loeb 261, 383)). However, it is not a frequently employed metaphor. Perhaps this metaphor has its origins in a Jewish context. The aspect of the present tense form together with the semantic content of the verb indicates continuing activity. The second verb δοξάζηται is a present passive subjunctive form whose aspect also indicates an incomplete activity.
The comparison clause marked by καθώς defines what the writers mean by this metaphor, referencing the quick response of people in Thessalonica to the gospel proclamation (cf. 1 Thess 1:6, 9-10). The καί is ascensive. Whether πρός conveys a sense of motion (“to you”) or indicates relationship (“with you”) is unclear.
The second prayer petition speaks to the situation of the writers. They ask God “to rescue” (ῥυσθῶμεν – aorist passive subjunctive) them. See a similar usage in 2 Corinthians 1:8-11. The prepositional phrase marked by ἀπό indicates the source of the danger. It is people who are ἀτόπων καὶ πονηρῶν. These adjectives occur together once in an oration by Demosthenes (De corona trierarchiae 21.5): καίτοι πῶς οὐκ ἄτοπον τούτους μὲν αὐτοὺς πονηροτάτους τῶν πολιτῶν νομίζειν (“Yet is it not absurd for you to consider these orators themselves the basest of your citizens”), but the terms are not coordinated in this citation as they are in 2 Thess. The terms also occur together in OG Job 35.12, describing the insolent, but again not as a coordinated pair. Pilate declares that Jesus “has done nothing ἄτοπον” (Luke 23:41).
For some reason the writers consider it necessary to explain why they are asking for such prayers. They offer this in the γάρ clause. The genitive seems t0 mark possession and the clause has the sense “for the faith does not belong to everyone.” The NIV’s translation makes “faith” the thing possessed. The arthrous πίστις may mean “the faith” as the message of the gospel and not the personal response of faith. The genitive πάντων is anarthrous and seems to have a possessive nuance. Perhaps the writers are stating that the faith is not generally accepted or recognized by everyone in their culture. See Wanamaker’s exegesis that is somewhat different (275-76).
3Πιστὸς δέ ἐστιν ὁ κύριος, ὃς στηρίξει ὑμᾶς καὶ φυλάξει ἀπὸ τοῦ πονηροῦ.
The main clause is verbless, but it is linked with a compound, adjectival relative clause that defines ὁ κύριος, the subject of the main clause. Presumably ὁ κύριος reflects the same expression used in 3:1 (ὁ λόγος τοῦ κυρίου) and whatever referent we determine for that previous expression will be the same intended in 3:3. The writers give the predicate adjective prominence by placing it first in its clause. It may resonate with the cognate noun ἡ πίστις used in the last clause of 3:2. The adjective defines a characteristic of ὁ κύριος. δέ may be contrastive, if the writers intended their audience to discern a connection between ἡ πίστις…πιστός.
The two verbs (στηρίξει…φυλάξει) in the relative clause are future tense forms and both are defined by the single accusative pronoun ὑμᾶς. The writers used στηρίζω in the prayer for their correspondents in 2:16-17. The second verb is modified by the adverbial prepositional phrase ἀπὸ τοῦ πονηροῦ. The substantival adjective could be masculine (referencing Satan) or neuter (referring to evil in general). Given the reference to “insolent and evil people” who seek to do them harm in 3:2, presumably the adjective has a personal reference in 3:3. The same ambiguity occurs in Matt 6:13. See also John 17:12. This is the only use of φυλάσσω in 1 & 2 Thessalonians.
4πεποίθαμεν δὲ ἐν κυρίῳ ἐφ’ ὑμᾶς, ὅτι ἃ παραγγέλλομεν [καὶ] ποιεῖτε καὶ ποιήσετε.
πείθομαι is cognate with πίστις/πιστός, so this is the third use of this lexically related terminology in three verses. The perfect active tense form πεποίθαμεν indicates a state or condition, perhaps best translated as “we stand convinced.” δέ marks a new, but logically connected topic, probably with an additive sense “now.” The prepositional phrase ἐν κυρίῳ is anarthrous consistent with the formulation of the phrase ἐν Χριστῷ and probably has a locative sense (“in the sphere of κύριος”). Perhaps he uses ἐν κυρίῳ because of the several occurrences of ὁ κύριος in the context and the situation of spiritual conflict that is the focus of this pericope. A second adverbial prepositional phrase ἐφ’ ὑμᾶς identifies the subject about whom the writers have confidence.
ὅτι could mark indirect discourse, i.e., what the writers are confident about (“that you are doing and will do…”), or causal, i.e., “because you are doing and will do….” If καί 1˚ is original, then we have a “both…and” construction with the repeated conjunction. Note that MS B reads και εποιησατε και ποειτε και ποιησετε. The writers front the object of the verbs, namely the substantival relative clause ἃ παραγγέλομεν, that functions to frame the action of the two principal verbs. They use a present active tense form παραγγέλλομεν that affirms the alignment of these believers generally with the instruction. This is the first use of παραγγέλλω in 2 Thessalonians, but the writers will use it again in 3:6, 10, 12 (1 Thess. 4:11).
5Ὁ δὲ κύριος κατευθύναι ὑμῶν τὰς καρδίας εἰς τὴν ἀγάπην τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ εἰς τὴν ὑπομονὴν τοῦ Χριστοῦ.
The writers end this section with another prayer petition, marked by the aorist optative form κατευθύναι (as also in 1 Thess. 3:11; these are the only two occurrences of this verb in Paul’s letters). As they do in 2:16-17 the writers place the subject at the beginning of the petition, identifying to whom it is addressed (ὁ κύριος). They mark this new topic with δέ as they also did in 2:16. They place the possessive pronoun before the object τὰς καρδίας. They use a similar word order in 2:17. Possessive pronouns normally occur in the predicate position and can either precede or follow the noun phrase. Note the position of ἡμῶν in v. 14. The genitive is probably possessive.
Two adverbial prepositional phrases modify the verb. Both employ εἰς expressing the idea of motion, probably in a metaphorical sense, given the head nouns ἀγάπη, ὑπομονή. The genitives τοῦ θεοῦ…τοῦ Χριστοῦ may be objective here, i.e., “the love for God and the endurance for the Messiah.” However, given the writers’ emphasis upon the Lord’s intervention for rescue and deliverance from unscrupulous people and that he strengthens and guards his people from evil, it is more likely that these are subjective genitives, i.e., the love that God displays for his people and the constancy that the Lord Jesus shows in his protection of them. The article seems to have a specifying function. For ὑπομονή see 2 Thess 1:4.
6Παραγγέλλομεν δὲ ὑμῖν, ἀδελφοί, ἐν ὀνόματι τοῦ κυρίου [ἡμῶν] Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ στέλλεσθαι ὑμᾶς ἀπὸ παντὸς ἀδελφοῦ ἀτάκτως περιπατοῦντος καὶ μὴ κατὰ τὴν παράδοσιν ἣν παρελάβοσαν παρ’ ἡμῶν.
The writers end their letter with a series of general instructions, emphasized by the repeated use of the verb παραγγέλλω (vv. 6, 9, 12). The main verb is a present tense form indicating a current activity. It is completed with an indirect object (ὑμῖν) and a direct object in the form of the infinitive στέλλεσθαι that expresses the content of the instruction. The vocative ἀδελφοί indicates for whom they give the instruction, as well as a change of topic (together with δέ). For some reason the writers think it is necessary to ground what they require from the audience in the authority of the Lord Jesus Christ. Perhaps this was a particularly contentious issue? ἐν ὀνόματι expresses the idea of association or means, with the sense of “authority” (BDAG, 713, 1dγג). BDAG indicates that this expression has no correspondence in Greek literature and may be Semitism. Perhaps in this context it is equivalent to the previous ἐν κυρίῳ (v.4). The genitive modifier of the head noun incorporates the full title τοῦ κυρίου [ημῶν] Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, and this may also emphasize the authority they appeal to for this instruction. See v. 18 for a similar use of the full title.
The present middle infinitive στέλλεσθαι marks the beginning of the indirect imperative. This verb only occurs in the NT in the middle voice. It means “keep away from, stand aloof from” and the middle voice probably infers intentionality on the part of the subject to act in this manner. The accusative ὑμᾶς is the subject of the infinitive. The preposition ἀπό indicates separation and marks an adverbial modifier of the infinitive. The head noun of the phrase is ἀδελφοῦ and παντός in this anarthrous construction means “every” without exception. What is the relationship between this use of ἀδελφός and the vocative form employed in the main clause? The anarthrous present participle περιπατοῦντος is probably attributive, modifying the anarthrous ἀδελφοῦ. It has an ethical register here, as indicated by its adverbial modifier ἀτάκτως (“disruptively,” “in a disorderly or irresponsible manner,” or “irregular in some sense”). The adverb only occurs in the NT in 2 Thess 3:6, 11 and the cognate verb in 2 Thess 3:7. The cognate adjective also occurs in 1 Thess 5:14. Its frequent use suggests that disruptive behavior was a particular problem in the Thessalonian house church. The repetition of the same charge in v.11 indicates how seriously the writers considered this issue to be and a threat to the very survival of this house church.
In contrast to ἀτάκτως, the writers use the prepositional phrase κατὰ τὴν παράδοσιν to describe the appropriate standard of behavior. The article suggests a specific tradition that is defined in the relative clause follows. The construction implies the repetition of περιπατοῦντος, given the negative μή. The relative clause incorporates a Hellenistic form of the second aorist third person plural ending, namely παρελάβοσαν. Many text witnesses read παρελαβετε. The verb phrase παραλαμβάνω τὴν παράδοσιν describes the reception of traditions that are being handed on (note a similar use of this verb in 1 Cor 15:1-4). The writers have used παράδοσις in 2:15 to describe the content of their message (see also 1 Cor 11:2). Contrast this usage with Jesus’ employment of this lexeme to describe Jewish tradition (Matt 15:2; Mk 7:5, 9). Paul uses it in Col 2:8 to describe false teaching or Jewish ‘traditions’ (see also Gal 1:14). The adverbial phrase παρ’ ἡμῶν reflects the prepositional prefix that forms the compound verb. Note the alliteration with the morpheme παρα-.
7Αὐτοὶ γὰρ οἴδατε πῶς δεῖ μιμεῖσθαι ἡμᾶς, ὅτι οὐκ ἠτακτήσαμεν ἐν ὑμῖν 8οὐδὲ δωρεὰν ἄρτον ἐφάγομεν παρά τινος, ἀλλ’ ἐν κόπῳ καὶ μόχθῳ νυκτὸς καὶ ἡμέρας ἐργαζόμενοι πρὸς τὸ μὴ ἐπιβαρῆσαί τινα ὑμῶν·
In vv. 7-11 the writers present a series of explanations to support their concern and their instruction. The length of this section again highlights the importance of this problem of disorderliness. In the first γάρ clause the writers urge their audience to reflect on the behavior of these evangelist when they lived among them. The nominative plural intensive pronoun that fronts the initial clause functions like the equivalent of the pointed finger. The writers employed this same construction several times in 1 Thessalonians (2:1; 3:3; 5:2).
The interrogative πῶς marks an indirect question (see a similar use in 1 Thess 1:9; 4:1). δεῖ is an impersonal verb form meaning “it is necessary” and almost always is completed by an infinitive. In this case the present middle infinitive μιμεῖσθαι functions as the complementary infinitive. The subject of the main verb remains the subject of the infinitive and the accusative pronoun ἡμᾶς is the direct object. The writers use this verb again in v. 9. This verb is always in the middle voice in the NT. The middle voice infers some decision on the part of the subject is necessary to involve them in this action. The aspect of the present infinitive form indicates an incomplete activity.
In my opinion, the ὅτι conjunction marks a causal clause, explaining why these believers can imitate the behavior of the writers. Ιn the Pauline and Petrine writings the rhetorical structure of two negatives (οὐκ, οὐδέ) followed by a contrasting clause marked by ἀλλά occurs frequently. It gives prominence to the final statement that usually is the preferred option. The writers use the verb ἀτακτέω, the only occurrence in the NT, to describe how they did not act in the social context of the new house church. ἐν ὑμῖν defines the community who observed their behavior. The second negative clause in the subordinate clause also incorporates an aorist tense form, namely ἐφάγομεν. The adverbial accusative δωρεὰν means “gratis, without payment.” The writers give it prominence by placing it first in the clause. The direct object ἄρτον comes second, followed by the verb. The adverbial phrase παρά τινος incorporates an indefinite pronoun and indicates from whom they might have accepted such bread without payment.
The third, contrasting clause is marked by ἀλλά. Finally we come to the kind of behavior that the writers desire their audience to emulate. The clause lacks a finite verb. Wanamaker regards this as a syntactical faux pas and evidence that the letter was composed in a hurried fashion. However, it is also possible that the writers expect the listeners to insert a verb such as “we behaved in an orderly fashion” or “we ate our bread,” with the result that the present middle participle ἐργαζόμενοι functions adverbially either expressing cause or instrumentality. The participle is modified by the compound prepositional phrase marked by ἐν expressing manner (κόπῳ καὶ μόχθῳ). The writers used the same lexical combination in 1 Thess. 2:9. A genitive of time adds further definition to the nature of work, indicating time ‘during which’ (“night and day”).
Lastly, the writers provide an explanation for their efforts in the articulated infinitive clause marked by πρός. Probably it communicates a result. ἐπιβαρῆσαι is an aorist active infinitive and means “to burden, to be a burden.” The writers used this verb in 1 Thess 2:9 to express the same idea. The first person plural subject continues and so this means that the partitive genitive construction τινα ὑμῶν functions as the object of the infinitive.
9οὐχ ὅτι οὐκ ἔχομεν ἐξουσίαν, ἀλλ’ ἵνα ἑαυτοὺς τύπον δῶμεν ὑμῖν εἰς τὸ μιμεῖσθαι ἡμᾶς.
It is possible to read these two clauses as parenthetical comments. Both are elliptical in that they do not have a main clause. Perhaps we need to supply something like “it is (not).” Note again the contrast between the negative οὐχ and the positive contrast marked by ἀλλά. ὅτι may be causal here. The writers claim they possess ἐξουσίαν to require the Thessalonian Christians to support them, but they choose not to exercise it. Paul explains some of his motives for not doing this in 1 Thess 2 and 1 Cor. 9. Presumably, they are referring to apostolic ‘authority’. The second clause give the purpose for their actions, marked by ἵνα. The verb δῶμεν has a direct object, namely the reflexive pronoun ἑαυτούς, modified by the appositional τῦπον, as well as an indirect object, namely ὑμῖν. This use of τῦπος is paralleled in Phil 3:17; 1 Thess 1:7. The articulated present middle infinitive τὸ μιμεῖσθαι is marked by εἰς as expressing purpose. It is possible to read μιμεῑσθαι as a present passive form and thus ἡμᾶς would be the subject. However, because the principal verb has a first person plural subject, it would not be usual, if the same subject continues to be the subject of the infinitive, also for it to be stated as ἡμᾶς. For this reason, it is more likely that the immediately preceding reference to ὑμῖν references the implied subject in an ad sensum manner and the infinitive is a middle voice.
10καὶ γὰρ ὅτε ἦμεν πρὸς ὑμᾶς, τοῦτο παρηγγέλλομεν ὑμῖν, ὅτι εἴ τις οὐ θέλει ἐργάζεσθαι μηδὲ ἐσθιέτω.
The writers offer a second explanation for the instruction, marked by γάρ. καί is ascensive and modifies ὅτε, a temporal conjunction (“even/indeed when”). The writers reference their previous experience with these believers, using the imperfect verb form ἦμεν and the prepositional phrase πρὸς ὑμᾶς indicating presence with someone. Placing the subordinate clause before the main clause allows its action to frame the action of the main verb.
In the main clause the writers place the object first (τοῦτο), but then define the referent of the demonstrative pronoun with the following ὅτι clause of indirect discourse. This is an example of τοῦτο functioning as a forward-pointing device. The writers employ the imperfect active tense form παρηγγέλλομεν indicating a past continuous action. They were repeating this instruction. Within the ὅτι clause there is a first class condition marked by εἴ. The subject is indefinite (τις). The main verb of the protasis οὐ θέλει indicates a wish or desire and the verb takes a complementary infinitive (ἐργάζεσθαι). The apodosis is a third person prohibition marked by μηδέ (“he should not eat”). ἐσθίω is the present tense form and ἔφαγον is the aorist tense form (v. 8).
11Ἀκούομεν γάρ τινας περιπατοῦντας ἐν ὑμῖν ἀτάκτως μηδὲν ἐργαζομένους ἀλλὰ περιεργαζομένους·
This is the third explanatory clause, again marked by γάρ, related to the initial instruction and it reflects some of the terminology in the accusation. The writers begin with the present active tense form ἀκούομεν indicating an incomplete activity, i.e., “we keep hearing.” They do not reveal the source of their information. The indirect discourse is marked by the series of adverbial present participles (περιπατοῦντας…ἐργαζομένους…περιεργαζομένους). The aspect of the present participles indicates incomplete activity, i.e., this activity is continuing. The indefinite pronoun τινας defines the subject. The writers never identify the offenders because either they do not know who was involved or do not want to escalate conflict and difficulties. The verb phrase περιπατοῦντας…ἀτάκτως parallels the same phrase in v.6. ἐν ὑμῖν has a locative function (“among you”).
The second and third participles perhaps are causal, elaborating the sense of ἀτάκτως. The writers again use the sequence of a negative clause, marked by μηδέν, followed by a contrasting clause, indicated by ἀλλά. However, in this context they are not indicating that this action is good – it is just different from the previous. μηδέν is the negative, neuter singular adjective “nothing” and functions as object of ἐργαζομένους. With the present middle participle περιεργαζομένους (“to be intrusively busy, to be a busybody, meddler”) the writers create a word-play. BDAG (800) indicate that the same word-play occurs in Classical Greek writers (e.g., Demosthenes Phil. 4, 72 in the sense of meddling in the affairs of the city-state). This is its only occurrence in the NT. Horsley (New Doc. Illustrating Early Christianity 3, 26) notes a context in Zenon Papyri where it refers to haggling over the price of a horse and then in a IV cent. CE papyrus where a person is meddling with another person’s property in order to gain legal advantage.
12τοῖς δὲ τοιούτοις παραγγέλλομεν καὶ παρακαλοῦμεν ἐν κυρίῳ Ἰησοῦ Χριστῷ, ἵνα μετὰ ἡσυχίας ἐργαζόμενοι τὸν ἑαυτῶν ἄρτον ἐσθίωσιν.
The writers now give instruction to the “meddlers” (τοῖς…τοιούτοις). The pronoun has the sense “to such people as this.” It is dative of indirect object, modifying παραγγέλλομεν. Its first position gives it prominence. The writers mark this new topic with δέ. Coupled with the verb “instruct” (παραγγέλλομεν) is the similar sounding verb παρακαλοῦμεν “we are urging, exhorting,” or “encouraging, requesting.” The nuance depends upon how you read the interaction. Once more the writers appeal to the authority of the Lord Jesus Christ by adding the adverbial prepositional phrase ἐν κυρίῳ Ἰησοῦ Χριστῷ, as in v. 6. The inference is that if such people continue in their disorderly behavior, they are disobeying Jesus Christ.
The ἵνα clause marks the indirect imperative that contains the instruction. In v. 6 the writers used the infinitive to express the indirect imperative. The main verb is ἐσθίωσιν, a present active subjunctive verb form. Its object τὸν…ἄρτον precedes the verb. In each case in this verse some modifier precedes the verb form. The reflexive pronoun ἑαυτῶν emphasizes the personal application of this instruction and that the food involved belongs to specific persons. Each eats the bread that belongs to them. The initial adverbial participle construction frames this action. It probably indicates the means by which people possess their bread. μετὰ ἠσυχίας in this context is the opposite of ἀτάκτως. Note its use in 2 Timothy 2.11. μετά + genitive marks attendant circumstance. This is the fourth use of the verb ἐργάζομαι in vv. 7-12.
13Ὑμεῖς δέ, ἀδελφοί, μὴ ἐγκακήσητε καλοποιοῦντες.
Having expended so much space dealing with the problem of “disorderly believers,” the writers add a short, general instruction for all the brothers whether living orderly or disorderly. They front the subject ὑμεῖς, giving it prominence. It also signals a change in topic, along with δέ and the vocative ἀδελφοί. The imperative is in the form of a prohibition, namely μή + aorist subjunctive. ἐγκακέω means “to be discouraged, lose enthusiasm” and it occurs several times in the Pauline corpus (e.g., 2 Cor 4:1, 16; Gal 6:9; Eph 3:13) and once in Luke 18.1. The adverbial present participle καλοποιοῦντες defines further the activity of the subject in relationship to the verb. This is its only occurrence in the NT and it has few previous attestations. It is synonymous with ἀγαθοποιέω, a more frequently used verb in the NT particularly in 1 Peter. Paul uses the verb phrase τὸ καλὸν ποιεῖν several times (e.g., Rom 7:21; 2 Cor 13:7; Gal 6:9; 1 Thess 5:21)
14Εἰ δέ τις οὐχ ὑπακούει τῷ λόγῳ ἡμῶν διὰ τῆς ἐπιστολῆς, τοῦτον σημειοῦσθε μὴ συναναμίγνυσθαι αὐτῷ, ἵνα ἐντραπῇ·
In my opinion, the writers conclude this section with a third instruction. It is marked δέ and structured as a first class condition (εἰ + indicative), with an imperative in the apodosis (σημειοῦσθε). They continue to keep the accusation general by using the indefinite pronoun as the subject of the verb in the protasis. ὑπακούει is present indicative active and its aspect in concert with its semantics may suggest aktionsart such as “if anyone continues not to obey….” The verb can take its object either in the genitive or dative, as here. τῷ λόγῳ has the sense “this rule or principle of conduct,” or perhaps more generally “the message.” Consider its use to describe the “Ten Words” that form the Ten Commandments. The genitive ἡμῶν is probably subjective. The adverbial prepositional phrase διὰ τῆς ἐπιστολῆς indicates the means by which the message is being communicated.
In the apodosis the writers place the direct object first, giving it prominence. The demonstrative pronoun probably has deictic force here. The verb σημειόω means “to take special notice of, mark” (BDAG, 921), or “to put a tag on.” This is its only use in the NT and it is a present middle imperative form. The present middle infinitive συναναμίγνυσθαι means “mingle, associate with” (BDAG, 965) and it takes a dative object (αὐτῷ). μή + infinitive could communicate an independent command/prohibition (as in Rom 12:15 or Phil 3:16) or an indirect command. The writers require some limitation in relationship with such a person. Paul employs the same verb in 1 Corinthians 5:9-11, where he also is giving instructions regarding a refractory member of that congregation. The purpose for this action is indicated in the ἵνα clause. ἐντρέπω means “to shame or to show deference” (BDAG, 341). Here it is a second aorist passive subjunctive form and probably means “in order that he might be shamed.”
15καὶ μὴ ὡς ἐχθρὸν ἡγεῖσθε, ἀλλὰ νουθετεῖτε ὡς ἀδελφόν.
Two additional imperatives, coordinated with the previous σημειοῦσθε, explain how believers should implement this instruction. Once more we have a negative clause (μή + present imperative) followed by ἀλλά + present imperative. καί links this command with σημειοῦσθε that precedes. ἡγεῖσθε has the sense “do not regard” and there is an implied τοῦτον as object. The comparison marked by ὡς ἐχθρόν implies that the verb is repeated. Note the chiastic structure in the the two clauses.
The ἀλλά conjunction is adversative and indicates the appropriate way to relate to such a person. The present active imperative νουθετεῖτε means “to admonish by telling the truth.” So the goal is to correct such as person, but “correct him as a brother,” i.e., a fellow-Christian. Again in the comparison the main verb is implied. This additional information characterizes this limited relationship as one in which the errant believer is constantly being encouraged to repent and change, so that the congregation can stop shaming him by refusing to associate with him.
16Αὐτὸς δὲ ὁ κύριος τῆς εἰρήνης δῴη ὑμῖν τὴν εἰρήνην διὰ παντὸς ἐν παντὶ τρόπῳ. ὁ κύριος μετὰ πάντων ὑμῶν.
I regard this verse as an independent petition that the writers present to the Lord on behalf of these believers as they carry out these instructions and reflect upon the other subjects discussed in chapters 1-2. δέ marks the new topic. The intensive pronoun αὐτός follows the pattern used in the petition in 2:16-17. ὁ κύριος is defined by the genitive τῆς εἰρήνης, that expresses a characteristic of the head noun or perhaps indicates that the Lord produces peace. δῴη probably is an aorist optative form, indicating the petition as in 2:16-17 and 3:5. δίδωμι takes its usual indirect (ὑμῖν) and direct (τὴ εἰρήνην) objects. The repetition of εἰρήνη must be intentional. Two adverbial prepositional phrases modify the verb, making the provision of peace constant in time and manner. παντός probably implies χρόνου.
The last clause is verbless, but presumably is another petition. It reinforces the previous ideas expressed in διὰ παντὸς ἐν παντὶ τρόπῳ. The subject is the same of the previous clause and refers to the Lord Jesus Christ. μετά + genitive indicates association. The writers pray that the Lord “may be with you all.” This would include the refractory brother(s), with the hope that they would reconsider their conduct and become aligned with the instruction.
17Ὁ ἀσπασμὸς τῇ ἐμῇ χειρὶ Παύλου, ὅ ἐστιν σημεῖον ἐν πάσῃ ἐπιστολῇ· οὕτως γράφω.
We arrive at the final greeting. Although the first clause is verbless, presumably the verb in the second clause (γράφω) is assumed. The writers mark the subject with the article and nominative case (ὁ ἀσπασμός) and the article probably has a deictic function, namely “this greeting.” Given the discussion in 2:1-2 about letters spuriously attributed to Paul, the writers want to make sure that the recipients can affirm that this letter is genuinely from Paul and his group (remember the first person plural subjects throughout). The sentence affirms that the greeting is written by Paul himself. This does not necessarily extend to the rest of the letter. The pronominal adjective ἐμῇ may be somewhat emphatic. I think the genitive Παύλου (see also 1 Cor 16:21 and Col 4:18) is in fact the personal signature attached, indicating that the letter is “from Paul.” Perhaps the sudden change to a first person singular verb form similarly in 1 Thess 5:27 may signal that Paul himself has started at this point to write a final greeting.
The same verbless clause occurs in 1 Cor 16:21. The introduction to 1 Corinthians says that the letter comes from Paul and Sosthenes. This attribution to multiple authors is similar to 2 Thessalonians. See also Col 4:18 and Philemon 19.
The relative clause is marked with a neuter singular relative pronoun. It may refer to the entire scenario whereby Paul concludes the letter in his own writing and with some kind of signature. Alternatively, the neuter form may reflect the following σημεῖον, and this noun functions as the antecedent that has been incorporated into the relative clause (σημεῖον, ὅ ἐστιν ἐν πάσῃ ἐπιστολῇ). ἐν + dative is probably locative in sense. οὕτως is a general reference to the information in the first part of v. 17 (“in this way”) and it modifies γράφω.
18Ἡ χάρις τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ μετὰ πάντων ὑμῶν.
Presumably, this is the concluding petition and the assumed verb would be optative as in 1 Peter 1:2. The subject of the verbless clause is marked by the arthrous nominative noun ἡ χάρις. It is modified by the full name of the Lord Jesus Messiah. This is probably a subjective genitive, indicating who is acting in such a favourably manner. ἡμῶν is probably a genitive of subordination, modifying τοῦ κυρίου. μετὰ πάντων ὑμῶν replicates the same phrase in v. 16. μετά + genitive expresses association.