StrongerBible

suschēmatizō

συσχηματίζω

GreekG4964conform, fashion

Appears 2 times · tap a cell to see the verses

Rom 12:21Pe 1:14
Compound of
Word studyResearch-gradesoos-khay-mah-TEE-zohverb

What suschēmatizō means

to be molded to a pattern: to let something outside you set the shape of your life

TranslatabilityApproximateCertaintyStrong

The picture behind the word is a mold. It is built from a Greek noun for the shape or outward figure a thing has, joined to a prefix meaning "along with," so its plain force is to be shaped along with something, to come out matching the form that was pressed on you.

It is a rare word, and in the Bible it turns up only twice, both times in a warning. What the warning amounts to depends entirely on what a person is being shaped to:

  • In Romans 12:2 the mold is "this age," the present order of the world with its assumptions and loyalties, so refusing it is a question of allegiance rather than taste.
  • In 1 Peter 1:14 the mold is the readers' own cravings from the time before they knew God, so refusing it is a clean break with an old way of living.

Both times the wording leaves open whether a person does the shaping or has it done to them, and many scholars favor the second reading: this is pressure from outside, quietly at work on anyone who is not resisting it. Either way the instruction is a standing one, a lifelong stance rather than a single decision.

Paul sets the word against another in the same sentence, "be transformed" (μεταμορφόω). The contrast is real, but it lies in the direction of the change and in what is doing the shaping, not in a rule that one word always means the surface of a thing and the other its depths.

Rom 12:21Pe 1:14

Disputed

Whether συσχηματίζω, by virtue of its σχῆμα stem, denotes specifically outward or superficial conformity, in contrast to the μορφή word group as essential form. On the traditional analysis Romans 12:2 sets shallow fashioning after this age against a deep inward transformation; the counter-analysis holds that the two stems overlap substantially in Hellenistic Greek and that the contrast in Romans 12:2 is carried by the prefixes, the objects and the wider context rather than by any fixed lexical law.

  • majorityNo systematic σχῆμα/μορφή distinction can be sustained; the verb means simply to be conformed or molded to a pattern, and appeal to the stem to fix a superficial nuance over-reads the word's components. Philippians 3:21 uses the two word groups almost interchangeably (μετασχηματίσει ... σύμμορφον), and Plutarch and Euripides pair the stems freely.; Moisés Silva, Biblical Words and Their Meaning: An Introduction to Lexical Semantics, rev. ed. (Zondervan, 1994); James Barr, The Semantics of Biblical Language (Oxford University Press, 1961); D. A. Carson, Exegetical Fallacies, 2nd ed. (Baker, 1996); C. E. B. Cranfield, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans (ICC, T&T Clark, 1975 and 1979), ad loc. 12:2; Douglas J. Moo, The Epistle to the Romans (NICNT, Eerdmans, 1996), ad loc. 12:2; James D. G. Dunn, Romans 9-16 (Word Biblical Commentary 38B, 1988), 712
  • minorityσχῆμα denotes the changeable outward fashion or bearing, while μορφή denotes the form belonging to a thing's essence, so Romans 12:2 deliberately contrasts a merely external conformity to the present age with an inward, essential transformation.; J. B. Lightfoot, Saint Paul's Epistle to the Philippians, detached note on μορφή and σχῆμα, 127-133; R. C. Trench, Synonyms of the New Testament, §70; William Sanday and Arthur C. Headlam, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans (ICC, T&T Clark, 1895), ad loc. 12:2

What scholars say about suschēmatizō

BDAG, LSJ, Louw and Nida, Moulton and Milligan, and Abbott-Smith converge on a core sense of forming or molding oneself to a pattern; Louw and Nida classify it under behavior and conduct rather than by its σχῆμα stem, while LSJ adds an active "correct, remodel" and a technical astronomical passive used of heavenly bodies similarly situated (Ptolemy, Sextus Empiricus, Vettius Valens). The compound is pre-Pauline: Aristotle, Topica 6.14 (151b8) uses it of remodeling definitions, and Plutarch, Moralia 83 and 100F, of molding mental impressions and of forming oneself after another's example. It is absent from the Septuagint, though cognates occur (σχῆμα at Isaiah 3:17; μετασχηματίζω at 4 Maccabees 9:22). The Lightfoot and Trench σχῆμα/μορφή distinction has been criticized methodologically by Barr, Silva and Carson and is rejected by most Romans commentators (Cranfield, Moo, Dunn, Barrett, Käsemann, Fitzmyer, Schreiner, Jewett), Moo noting the near-interchangeable use of the two groups in Philippians 3:21; Schneider's TDNT article (7:954-958) defines σχῆμα as sense-perceptible outward structure without pressing a rigid contrast. On the ambiguous middle-passive form of συσχηματίζεσθε, Dunn (Romans 9-16, 712) and Wallace (Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics, 416-417, followed by the NET Bible) favor the passive, since direct middles are rare in the Greek New Testament, while others hold the two cannot be sharply separated in a plural imperative of this type. The older Dana and Mantey rule that a present prohibition demands cessation of an act already in progress is rejected by Wallace (714-717) and by verbal aspect scholarship (Porter, Fanning, Campbell, Decker), and Moo rejects the "stop conforming" reading on contextual grounds. Käsemann, Beker, Dunn, Jewett and Wright anchor Romans 12:1-2 in the two ages scheme, so that nonconformity is eschatological allegiance; Bartolomei (Religions, 2024) argues σχῆμα in Paul marks the transient, passing condition of the present age rather than mere outward appearance. On 1 Peter 1:14, Elliott, Achtemeier, Michaels and Jobes hold the verse is not literarily dependent on Romans but draws on shared early Christian catechetical tradition, the object there being the readers' former desires rather than this age.

In-depth research

This is a research paper, so it may be hard to read without scholarly background. It is useful if you want to dig even deeper into this word.

Sources

  • BDAG, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 3rd ed. (University of Chicago Press, 2000), s.v. συσχηματίζωlexicon
  • Liddell, Scott and Jones, A Greek-English Lexicon, 9th ed. with revised supplement (Clarendon Press, 1996), s.v. συσχηματίζωlexicon
  • Johannes P. Louw and Eugene A. Nida, Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament Based on Semantic Domains, 2nd ed. (United Bible Societies, 1989), s.v. συσχηματίζομαιlexicon
  • James Hope Moulton and George Milligan, The Vocabulary of the Greek Testament (Hodder and Stoughton, 1930), s.v. συσχηματίζωlexicon
  • Johannes Schneider, "σχῆμα, μετασχηματίζω," in Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, ed. Gerhard Friedrich, vol. 7 (Eerdmans, 1971), 954-958lexicon
  • Moisés Silva, ed., New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology and Exegesis, 2nd ed. (Zondervan, 2014), s.v. σχῆμαlexicon
  • Moisés Silva, Biblical Words and Their Meaning: An Introduction to Lexical Semantics, rev. ed. (Zondervan, 1994)monograph
  • James Barr, The Semantics of Biblical Language (Oxford University Press, 1961)monograph
  • D. A. Carson, Exegetical Fallacies, 2nd ed. (Baker, 1996)monograph
  • C. E. B. Cranfield, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans (ICC, T&T Clark, 1975 and 1979)commentary
  • Douglas J. Moo, The Epistle to the Romans (NICNT, Eerdmans, 1996)commentary
  • James D. G. Dunn, Romans 9-16 (Word Biblical Commentary 38B, 1988), 712commentary
  • Ernst Käsemann, Commentary on Romans, trans. Geoffrey W. Bromiley (Eerdmans, 1980)commentary
  • Robert Jewett, Romans: A Commentary (Hermeneia, Fortress, 2007)commentary
  • Daniel B. Wallace, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics: An Exegetical Syntax of the New Testament (Zondervan, 1996), 416-417 and 714-717monograph
  • Stanley E. Porter, Verbal Aspect in the Greek of the New Testament, with Reference to Tense and Mood (Peter Lang, 1989)monograph
  • Buist M. Fanning, Verbal Aspect in New Testament Greek (Clarendon Press, 1990)monograph
  • Michael B. Thompson, Clothed with Christ: The Example and Teaching of Jesus in Romans 12.1-15.13 (JSNTSup 59, Sheffield Academic Press, 1991)monograph
  • Teresa Bartolomei, "Schema: A Semantic Puzzle. Some Hermeneutical and Translational Difficulties about Philippians 2:7d," Religions 15, no. 5 (2024)article
  • John H. Elliott, 1 Peter: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary (Anchor Bible 37B, Doubleday, 2000)commentary
  • Paul J. Achtemeier, 1 Peter (Hermeneia, Fortress, 1996)commentary
  • J. Ramsey Michaels, 1 Peter (Word Biblical Commentary 49, 1988)commentary
  • Karen H. Jobes, 1 Peter (BECNT, Baker Academic, 2005)commentary

All attested forms of συσχηματίζω

present middle-or-passive imperative 2p

συσχηματίζεσθε

Rom 12:2

present middle-or-passive participle nominative m p

συσχηματιζόμενοι

1Pe 1:14