aischunō

αἰσχύνω derives from the noun αἶσχος ("ugliness, disgrace"); its earliest Homeric sense is physical (to disfigure, mar), extending in the classical period to "dishonor, tarnish" in the active and "feel shame, be disgraced" in the middle-passive (LSJ). In the NT the simplex appears only in the middle-passive αἰσχύνομαι (five times: Luke 16:3; 2 Cor 10:8; Phil 1:20; 1 Pet 4:16; 1 John 2:28); the active work of shaming is carried by the compound καταισχύνω and the subjective-of relation by ἐπαισχύνομαι (BDAG). Ancient grammarians distinguished the prospective αἰδώς from the retrospective αἰσχύνη (Trench, following Ammonius), a neat dichotomy that Cairns and B. Williams show is largely later scholasticism, since the words function as near-synonyms and Greek shame is already reflexive and internalized. The decisive background is the Septuagint, where the group renders בּוֹשׁ (with its objective, near-forensic sense of being disappointed or exposed when trust fails), כָּלַם, and חָפֵר, and crystallizes the eschatological formula "the one who trusts in the Lord will not be put to shame" (Isa 28:16 LXX, cited at Rom 9:33; 10:11; 1 Pet 2:6; cf. the lament psalter's μὴ καταισχυνθείην and Joel 2:26-27). Three lexical stances recur: Bultmann (TDNT) reads biblical shame as predominantly objective-forensic; Silva (NIDNTTE) minimizes the lexeme and locates theology in collocations; Spicq (TLNT) frames it culturally by the gaze of others. Much recent work reads the NT shame vocabulary through the Mediterranean honor-shame model (Malina; deSilva, Despising Shame; Moxnes; Hellerman on Philippians), with sustained critique from Crook (JBL 2009), Downing, Barclay (Paul and the Gift), and Te-Li Lau (Defending Shame).