2 Thessalonians 3:6

Now we command you, brethren, in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly, and not after the tradition which they received of us.

See under 2 Thessalonians 3:4 regarding "we command."

In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ ... This is an appeal by the apostle to the authority of his commission and office as an apostle of Christ. It should be noted that he did not fail to mention "in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ," thus making it clear that his command carried the full weight and authority of Christ himself. As Mason pointed out:

To do anything in a person's name seems to mean, in the first instance, the actual pronouncing of the name in the performance of the action, to do it "name on lip." Thus miracles were said to be performed "in the name of the Lord," that is, with audible repetition of the Lord's name[9]

The current widespread offerings of prayers without the "name on lip" mention of the Holy Saviour, in whose name alone any man has right of access to the Father, is a violation of the principle manifest in this verse. When Paul prayed or commanded "in the name of the Lord Jesus" he never forgot to make audible mention of it.

Although this verse has traditionally been appealed to as a basis of excommunicating disorderly members, there is no word in the text regarding the denial of holy communion to such offenders. The usual view of this is thus:

These he had ordered to study to be quiet and to mind their own business (1 Thessalonians 4:11,12); but it appears they had paid no attention to his order; and now he desires to exclude such from their communion.[10]

There may be some question whether or not a formal excommunication is meant here, especially in the light of 2 Thessalonians 3:15, where the offender is still to be treated as a "brother." Ecclesiastics have been far too bold in turning this verse to their own purposes. Morris seems to have caught more accurately the spirit of Paul's words in this place, thus:

"Withdraw from such ..." It signifies the withdrawing into oneself, a holding oneself aloof from the offender in question. This is not to be done in a spirit of superiority. The appeal to brotherliness shows that it is part of a man's duty to the brotherhood that he should not condone the deeds of any who, while claiming the name of brother, nevertheless denies by his actions what the brotherhood stands for.[11]

And not after the tradition ... This is not a reference to human tradition, but to apostolic teachings given orally before there was any such thing as a New Testament.

[9] A. J. Mason, op. cit., p. 162.

[10] Adam Clarke, op. cit., p. 575.

[11] Leon Morris, op. cit., p. 144.