Barry suggested that it would be unusual to have an impersonal noun as the object of παρακαλοῦντες, which is true. But, as Dimi pointed out, the ‘complete’ object (τὴν ἐπισυναγωγὴν ἑαυτῶν) is essentially personal.
This is wrong. There is no "complete object." ἐπισυναγωγήν is the object of ἐγκαταλείποντες. ἑαυτῶν is an objective genitive dependent on ἐπισυναγωγήν.
Mea culpa … I know the difference; that’s why I put ‘complete’ in quotes.
I encourage you to study the word παρακαλέω in its various usages and contexts -- it's simply not used in the way that you suggest. And ἐπισυναγωγή is not a personal noun.
I had looked at all 200+ instances of παρακαλέω in the LXX and the GNT. Here's some of what I found:
Isaiah 33:7 contains an instance in which παρακαλέω is used with a non-personal noun object: ἄγγελοι γὰρ ἀποσταλήσονται ἀξιοῦντες εἰρήνην πικρῶς κλαίοντες παρακαλοῦντες εἰρήνην. It seems that messengers would be sent out who would call for/urge peace.
In Colossians 2:2 the author uses παρακαλέω with a noun followed by the genitive pronoun: ἵνα παρακληθῶσιν αἱ καρδίαι αὐτῶν; granted, in this case, παρακαλέω seems to mean ‘encourage,’ but the construction is not dissimilar.
In Titus 2:6 παρακαλέω takes an infinitive as its object, creating a kind of purpose clause: τοὺς νεωτέρους ὡσαύτως παρακάλει σωφρονεῖν. Other instances where infinitives are used as secondary objects in the same way include Romans 12:1; 2 Corinthians 6:1; Ephesians 4:1; 1 Thessalonians 4:10; 1 Timothy 1:3; 2:1; Hebrews 13:9; 1 Peter 2:11; Jude 1:3.
It is followed by imperatives: 1 Thessalonians 5:14; Hebrews 13:22; 1 Peter 5:1–2; and used with a ἵνα clause: 2 Corinthians 12:8; 2 Thessalonians 3:12.
So it seems to me to well within the range of normal usage to infer a similar type of object in 10:25.
What negative conjunction? I think you are looking for a parallelism here which is not necessary to make sense out of the text.
I meant “adversative.” I’m not looking for “parallelism;” I’m seeing a not/but construction that negates one proposition in order to positively affirm another. As I said, I think this limits how much of the range of meaning of παρακαλέω can be used. If one insists on using some form of ἑαυτούς as the implied object, then I think one must supply another verbal idea to complete the thought, such as ἐπισυνάξαι.
No -- "Observe" is too weak here, and εἰς cannot bear a temporal sense. Better to see it of purpose.
LSJ’s first English gloss is “observe well,” which is what I used. ... I admit, I should not have used ‘until’ to convey the idea of purpose; I was trying to avoid the longer “for the purpose of” phrasing while trying to communicate the time element inherent in κατανοῶμεν.
Here’s a redo:
κατανοῶμεν ἀλλήλους εἰς παροξυσμὸν ἀγάπης καὶ καλῶν ἔργων
Observe-well/look-closely-at/thoughtfully-consider one another for the purpose of the stimulation of love and good works [in the one doing the considering],
μὴ ἐγκαταλείποντες τὴν ἐπισυναγωγὴν ἑαυτῶν, καθὼς ἔθος τισίν, ἀλλὰ παρακαλοῦντες
[which necessitates] not abandoning your gathering together, as is the custom of some, but rather urging/calling for [the gathering of yourselves] -- or [one another to get together].