Romans 7:19

An Exegetical Analysis of Romans 7:19-20: Aspect, Lexicon, and Syntax

Romans 7:19-20 forms a pivotal part of Paul’s complex reflection on the struggle between the flesh and the spirit, particularly within the context of the Law. This exegetical analysis will focus on critical grammatical and lexical issues within these verses. Specifically, it will address the aspectual nature of the present tense verbs (ποιῶ, πράσσω, θέλω), the precise syntactic function of the demonstrative pronoun τοῦτο, and the scope of the negative particle οὐ in relation to the main verbs. The interplay between these elements profoundly impacts the interpretation of Paul’s description of the internal conflict experienced by the believer.

Romans 7:19-20 (Nestle 1904):

οὐ γὰρ ὃ θέλω ποιῶ ἀγαθόν, ἀλλ’ ὃ οὐ θέλω κακὸν τοῦτο πράσσω.

εἰ δὲ ὃ οὐ θέλω ἐγὼ τοῦτο ποιῶ, οὐκέτι ἐγὼ κατεργάζομαι αὐτό, ἀλλὰ ἡ οἰκοῦσα ἐν ἐμοὶ ἁμαρτία.

Key differences with SBLGNT (2010):

• In Romans 7:20, the SBLGNT omits the first occurrence of ἐγὼ, reading: εἰ δὲ ὃ οὐ θέλω τοῦτο ποιῶ, οὐκέτι ἐγὼ κατεργάζομαι αὐτό, ἀλλὰ ἡ οἰκοῦσα ἐν ἐμοὶ ἁμαρτία.
• Otherwise, the text of Romans 7:19-20 is consistent between Nestle 1904 and SBLGNT 2010 for these verses.

Textual Criticism (NA28) and Lexical Notes (KITTEL, BDAG)

Textual Criticism (NA28): The omission of the first ἐγὼ in Romans 7:20, as reflected in the SBLGNT, aligns with the critical text preferred by NA28. This reading is supported by significant early manuscripts (e.g., א A B C D* F G P Ψ 33 81 104 365 1739 1881 Byz Lect it vg syr cop). The inclusion of ἐγὼ (D¹ K L) is considered a scribal expansion, likely for emphasis or clarity, but not the earliest attested reading. The absence of ἐγὼ is generally preferred as grammatically sufficient and textually stronger, as Paul’s consistent use of first-person pronouns throughout the passage already conveys the personal nature of the struggle.

Lexical Notes:

• ποιῶ (poieō): BDAG defines it as “to make, produce, construct” or “to do, perform, carry out.” In this context, it signifies “to do” or “to practice.” KITTEL notes its broad semantic range, often implying an action with an external result.
• πράσσω (prassō): BDAG also translates this as “to do, perform,” but often with an emphasis on habitual or continuous action, or “to be engaged in.” In ethical contexts, it can denote “to do (something wrong/right) habitually or on principle” (BDAG, s.v. πράσσω, 2aβ). This nuance is crucial for the “iterative present” discussion. KITTEL highlights its frequent use for ongoing or repeated action, distinguishing it from ποιῶ which can refer to a single act. The alternation between ποιῶ and πράσσω within the immediate context (Rom 7:15, 7:19) suggests a rhetorical variation rather than a stark semantic difference, yet the iterative nuance of πράσσω remains pertinent.
• θέλω (thelō): BDAG glosses this as “to wish, want, desire, intend.” It consistently expresses the volition or intention of the subject.
• ἀγαθόν (agathon): The neuter singular of the adjective ἀγαθός, here functioning substantively as “the good” or “that which is good.”
• κακόν (kakon): Similarly, the neuter singular of κακός, functioning as “the bad” or “that which is evil.”
• οὐ (ou): The standard negative particle used with the indicative mood, indicating a factual negation. Its placement is critical for determining its scope.
• τοῦτο (touto): A demonstrative pronoun, neuter singular, meaning “this.” Its function in these verses (whether as part of a noun phrase or as an emphatic object) is a primary focus of analysis.
• ἁμαρτία (hamartia): “sin,” personified in this passage as an active force dwelling within the individual.

Translation Variants with Grammatical & Rhetorical Analysis

The primary exegetical challenges in Romans 7:19-20 revolve around the aspect of the present tense verbs and the precise grammatical parsing of the clauses, particularly the role of τοῦτο and the scope of οὐ.

Aspect of the Present Tense: Iterative vs. Continuous/Progressive

The initial inquiry concerning the present tense verbs (ποιῶ, πράσσω, θέλω) in Romans 7:19 (and implicitly 7:20) raises the question of whether they should be understood as “iterative presents,” denoting repeated or habitual action, or simply as “in-progress” or “continuous” actions. While the inherent aspectual semantics of the Greek present tense primarily describe an action from the standpoint of being ‘in progress’ without specifying its duration or frequency, the context frequently supplies such nuances.

The argument that Paul is describing a struggle with indwelling sin strongly favors an iterative or generalized present. Paul is not lamenting a single, isolated failure but a recurring pattern. This interpretation is reinforced by his subsequent statement in Romans 7:21: εὑρίσκω ἄρα τὸν νόμον, τῷ θέλοντι ἐμοὶ ποιεῖν τὸ καλόν, ὅτι ἐμοὶ τὸ κακὸν παρακεῖται (“So I find it to be a law that when I want to do what is good, evil is present with me.”). The use of νόμος (“law” or “principle”) here indicates a generalized, consistent, and therefore iterative reality. Therefore, the present tense verbs should be understood as describing a habitual, recurrent struggle, characteristic of Paul’s (or the ‘I’ figure’s) experience, rather than a single event. The use of πράσσω, with its lexical nuance often suggesting habitual action (BDAG), further supports an iterative reading in this context.

Grammatical Function of οὐ and Clause Structure

In both Romans 7:19 (ὃ οὐ θέλω) and 7:20 (ὃ οὐ θέλω), the negative particle οὐ immediately precedes the verb θέλω and is contained within a relative clause. This syntactic arrangement unequivocally indicates that οὐ modifies θέλω, negating the “wanting” or “desiring.” It cannot modify the subsequent main verb (ποιῶ or πράσσω) because it is syntactically bound to the relative clause. The structure ὃ οὐ θέλω acts as a unified nominal phrase, functioning as the object of the main verb. Any attempt to have οὐ modify ποιῶ in verse 20 (e.g., “if what I want, I do not do”) would violate standard Greek syntax and disrupt the clear parallel structure established in verse 19 and throughout the passage (e.g., Rom 7:15: οὐ γὰρ ὃ θέλω τοῦτο πράσσω, ἀλλ’ ὃ μισῶ τοῦτο ποιῶ).

Grammatical Function of κακὸν τοῦτο / τοῦτο

A crucial point of discussion is the parsing of κακὸν τοῦτο in verse 19 and τοῦτο in verse 20. Two main interpretations emerge:

1. κακὸν τοῦτο as a single noun phrase: “this bad thing.” This would mean τοῦτο is an adjective modifying κακόν. While plausible, it somewhat disrupts the symmetry with the preceding clause (ὃ θέλω ποιῶ ἀγαθόν), which does not have a parallel demonstrative modifying ἀγαθόν.
2. κακόν as part of the relative clause and τοῦτο as an emphatic object of πράσσω/ποιῶ: This reading suggests ὃ οὐ θέλω refers to “that which I do not want,” with κακόν functioning as an appositional or predicative nominative within that clause, effectively meaning “that (which is) evil (and which) I do not want.” Subsequently, τοῦτο (“this”) emphatically reiterates the object of the main verb, referring back to the entire preceding clause. This parsing creates a strong parallelism with Rom 7:15 (οὐ γὰρ ὃ θέλω τοῦτο πράσσω), where τοῦτο clearly serves as the emphatic object. The structure of Rom 7:19 can be understood as: “For I do not do the good which I want, but that (which is) evil (and) which I do not want—this I practice.” This interpretation preserves the rhetorical balance and clarity of Paul’s contrasting statements. The use of τοῦτο as an anaphoric or cataphoric emphatic demonstrative is common in Koine Greek. In 7:19, ὃ is likely cataphoric to κακὸν (the thing Paul does not want *is* evil), and then τοῦτο refers back to that entire concept as the object of his action.

The parallelism with 7:15 and the natural flow of the argument strongly support the second interpretation, where τοῦτο serves as an emphatic object, referring to the entire unwanted, evil action described in the preceding relative clause. This construction underscores the repetitive nature of the paradox Paul is describing.

Conclusions and Translation Suggestions

The exegetical analysis of Romans 7:19-20 reveals that Paul’s present tense verbs are best understood as iterative, describing a habitual and generalized struggle. The negative particle οὐ consistently negates the verb θέλω within the relative clause. The demonstrative pronoun τοῦτο functions as an emphatic object for the main verbs πράσσω and ποιῶ, reinforcing the preceding relative clause. This grammatical precision highlights the persistent, internal conflict central to Paul’s argument.

Based on this analysis, the following translation suggestions are offered:

1. For I do not do the good I desire, but the evil I do not desire—that I repeatedly practice.

   This translation emphasizes the iterative aspect of πράσσω and clarifies the emphatic nature of τοῦτο.

2. For what I want to do, I do not practice as good, but what I do not want as evil—this I perform.

   This option slightly rephrases the first clause to emphasize the “doing as good,” while maintaining the iterative sense for πράσσω. It keeps ἀγαθόν and κακόν as appositional or predicative.

3. For I do not habitually do the good that I wish, but the evil that I do not wish—that very thing I carry out.

   This rendering directly incorporates “habitually” for the iterative present and uses “that very thing” to capture the strong emphasis of τοῦτο, also highlighting the nuanced meaning of πράσσω as “carrying out” or “executing.”