I write this as someone in favor of working for a living, and who agrees with Shalom's answer, that this has been debated within Jewish sources.
Your question initially cited Thessalonians, which is in the Christian Bible, and the other citations are from Biblical verses from the Hebrew Bible. However, Jews follow not just the Bible (Tanach) but various sources of Oral Law, such as Mishnah, Talmud, Midrash, and so on. And, it is not just that these are competing sources of law and thought, but the latter informs upon the former, how to interpret these sources. Even within the sources of Oral Law, there are instructions that one shouldn't rule (determine law in practice) based on just the Mishnah, or based on just the Talmud. This is because one needs to know how to read these sources, know later strata of analysis, know where some statement applies or does not apply.
So, while for Christians, it may be a matter of collecting a series of Biblical verses which have a broad message, for Orthodox Jews, it may not suffice. They will want to know how these verses have been interpreted, and will also assume that Midrash, Talmud, writing of rabbis of later generations have all taken these (and other) Biblical sources as input and arrived at other conclusions, and will therefore look to the later sources. I'll play devil's advocate, to flesh this out.
To take your first example, you cite Genesis 3:17. This is a explicitly a curse to mankind. One might argue that this is therefore not the ideal situation. Are we certain that a life of hard toil is the ideal? If someone has succeeded early in life, must he still devote his life to labor in the field, rather than e.g. exploring intellectual pursuits? Womankind was cursed with pain of labor in birth. Does that mean that a woman must refuse an epidural during labor?
Your second example is from the book of Proverbs, Mishlei. This book is taken by Christians to be aphorisms of how to live a good life, but by many Jewish sources as Meshalim, allegories, where there is a literal meaning but an intended allegorical meaning of something else. Rashi, a prominent Biblical commentator, writes:
The soul of the lazy man desires but has nothing His soul desires all good, but has nothing.
but the soul of the diligent shall be sated The upright who eat from the toil of their hands. This is its meaning according to its simple interpretation. According to its allegorical meaning, in the future he will see the glory of the Torah scholar and long for it, but he will not achieve it.
Such that its intended focus is on labors in Torah study. Does the literal meaning, necessary in order to understand the allegory, also have standing as instructions for life? That could be debated.
I won't go through the remainder of the Biblical sources because the above should suffice to illustrate the idea. I'll just repeat, these sources might indeed imply this, and other sources might also endorse the idea. But mere Biblical verses, cited out of context and without other analysis, is not compelling to those operating in the Jewish tradition.
For one example of many, see Berachot 35b, where competing ideas of work vs. Torah study are brought, all based on analysis of Biblical verses.