For the good which I will, I do not; but the evil which I will not, that I do.

“Therefore it is in our power to will not to think these things; but not to bring it about that they shall pass away, so as not to come into the mind again; for this does not lie in our power, as I said; which is the meaning of that statement, "The good that I would, I do not; "for I do not will to think the things which injure me; for this good is altogether innocent. But "the good that I would, I do not; but the evil which I would not, that I do; "not willing to think, and yet thinking what I do not will. And consider whether it was not for these very things that David entreated God, grieving that he thought of those things which he did not will: "O cleanse Thou me from my secret faults. Keep Thy servant also from presumptuous sins, lest they get the dominion over me; so shall I be undefiled, and innocent from the great offence." And the apostle too, in another place: "Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ."”

“Do you see, how he acquits the essence of the soul, as well as the essence of the flesh, from accusation, and removes it entirely to sinful actions? For if the soul willeth not the evil, it is cleared: and if he does not work it himself, the body too is set free, and the whole may be charged upon the evil moral choice. For willing is indeed natural, and is from God: but willing on this wise is our own, and from our own mind.”

“After the Apostle has shown that the law is good from the fact that it agrees with reason, here he draws two conclusions according to the two things he had set down; the second is set down where he says, "But I see another law," etc. Concerning the first he does two things. First he draws the conclusion from what has been said; second he sets down a sign for the greater manifestation of it, where he says, "I am delighted," etc. Now he had set down two things above. The first indeed, that the law is spiritual; this having now been proved, he concludes thus: "I find then" — that is, by experience — that the law of Moses is in accord with me willing to do good, that is, with my reason, by which I approve the good and detest the evil, since that law itself also commands the good and forbids the evil. Deuteronomy 30:14: "The word is very near to you, in your mouth and in your heart, that you may do it." And in this way it was necessary that — that is, because evil, that is, sin or the tinder of sin, is present to me — that is, lies alongside my reason, as it were inhabiting my flesh. Micah 8:5: "From her that sleeps in your bosom, guard the closures of your mouth," that is, from the flesh. Then when he says, "For I am delighted," etc., he sets down a sign by which it is shown that the law agrees with reason. For no one is delighted except in that which is fitting to him. But man according to reason is delighted in the law of God; therefore the law of God is fitting to reason. And this is what he says: "I am delighted with the law of God according to the interior man," that is, according to reason and mind, which is called the interior man — not because the soul is figured according to the form of a man, as Tertullian held, or because it alone is the man, as Plato held, that man is a soul using a body; but because that which is more principal in man is called man, as was said above. Now in man that which is more principal according to appearance indeed is that which is exterior, namely the body so figured, which is called the exterior man; but according to truth, that which is intrinsic, namely the mind or reason, is what is here called the interior man. Psalm 118:103: "How sweet are your words to my throat." 1 Maccabees 12:9: "Having for our solace the holy books that are in our hands." Then when he says, "But I see," etc., he sets down another conclusion which corresponds to what he had said above, saying, "But I am carnal," etc. Saying, "I see another law in my members," which is the tinder of sin, which indeed can be called law for a twofold reason. In one way on account of similar effects, because just as the law induces to doing good, so the tinder induces to sinning. In another way by comparison to its cause. Now since the tinder is a certain punishment of sin, it has a twofold cause: one indeed sin itself, which took dominion in the sinner and imposed on him a law, which is the tinder, just as a lord imposes a law on a conquered servant. The other cause of the tinder is God, who placed this punishment on man when he sinned, so that the lower powers should not obey his reason. And according to this, the very disobedience of the lower powers, which is called the tinder, is called law insofar as it is introduced through the law of divine justice, like the sentence of a just judge, which has the force of law, according to that saying, 1 Kings 30:25: "And this was done from that day forward, and it was appointed and determined, and became as it were a law in Israel unto this day." But this law consists originally indeed in the sensitive appetite, but is found diffusively in all the members, which serve concupiscence unto sinning. Above, Romans 6:19: "Just as you presented your members to serve uncleanness," etc. And therefore he says, "in my members." Now this law has two effects in man. For first it resists reason, and as to this he says, "fighting against the law of my mind," that is, against the law of Moses, which is called the law of the mind insofar as it accords with the mind, or against the natural law, which is called the law of the mind because it is naturally implanted in the mind. Above, Romans 2:15: "Who show the work of the law written in their hearts." And concerning this fighting it is said, Galatians 5:17: "The flesh lusts against the spirit." The second effect is that it reduces man into servitude. And as to this he adds, "and captivating me," or according to another reading, "leading me captive," "in the law of sin, which is in my members," that is, in myself, after the manner of Hebrew speech, according to which nouns are put in place of pronouns. But the law of sin takes man captive in two ways: in one way, the sinning man, through consent and operation; in another way, the man established under grace, as to the movement of concupiscence. Concerning this captivity it is said in Psalm 125:1: "When the Lord turned the captivity of Sion." Then when he says, "Unhappy man that I am," etc., he deals with liberation from the law of sin, and does three things concerning this. First indeed he poses the question; second he gives the answer, where he says, "the grace of God," etc.; third he draws the conclusion, where he says, "therefore I myself," etc. Concerning the first he does two things. One thing indeed he confesses, namely his own misery, when he says, "Unhappy man that I am" — which indeed is on account of the sin which dwells in man, whether only as to the flesh, as in the just man, or also as to the mind, as in the sinner. Proverbs 14:34: "Sin makes peoples miserable." Psalm 37:7: "I have been made miserable and bowed down even to the end." The other thing he asks, saying, "Who will deliver me from the body of this death?" This indeed seems to be the question of one desiring, according to that saying, Psalm 141:10: "Bring my soul out of prison." It must be known, however, that in the body of man one can consider both the very nature of the body, which is fitting to the soul, whence the soul does not wish to be separated from it — 2 Corinthians 5:4: "We do not wish to be stripped, but to be clothed over" — and again the corruption of the body, which weighs down the soul, according to that saying, Wisdom 9:15: "The body which is corrupted weighs down the soul," etc. And therefore he says pointedly, "from the body of this death." Then when he says, "The grace of God," etc., he answers the question. For man cannot by his own powers be freed from the corruption of the body, nor even of the soul, although he consents with reason against sin, but only through the grace of Christ, according to that saying, John 8:36: "If the Son shall have made you free, you shall be free indeed." And therefore there follows, "the grace of God" — namely, will free me — "which is given through Jesus Christ." John 1:17: "Grace and truth came through Jesus Christ." Now this frees from the body of this death in two ways: in one way, so that the corruption of the body does not dominate the mind, dragging it to sin; in another way, so that the corruption of the body is totally removed. As to the first, therefore, it is fitting for the sinner to say: "grace has freed me from the body of this death," that is, it has freed me from the sin into which the soul is led by the corruption of the body. But from this the just man is already freed, whence it belongs to him to say, as to the second: "the grace of God has freed me from the body of this death," namely, that in my body there be no corruption of sin or of death — which will be in the resurrection. Then when he says, "Therefore I myself," etc., he draws a conclusion which, according to the two aforesaid expositions, is inferred differently from what precedes. For according as the aforesaid words are expounded in the person of the sinner, the conclusion is to be inferred thus: it was said that the grace of God freed me from the body of this death, namely so that I might not be led by it into sin; therefore, when I shall already be freed, with the mind I serve the law of God, but according to the flesh the law of sin, which indeed remains in the flesh as to the tinder, through which the flesh lusts against the spirit. But if the aforesaid words are understood from the person of the just man, it is to be inferred thus: the grace of God through Jesus Christ freed me from the body of this death, namely so that in me there be no corruption of sin and of death. Therefore, I myself, one and the same, before I am freed, with the mind serve the law of God, consenting to it, but with the flesh I serve the law of sin, insofar as my flesh, according to the law of the flesh, is moved to concupiscence.”

“For the good that I would, I do not,.... The apostle here repeats what he had delivered in Rom 7:15 to strengthen and confirm this part of his experience; that though he had a will to that which was good, yet he wanted power, and had none of himself to perform; and therefore often did what he would not, and what he would he did not. to strengthen and confirm this part of his experience; that though he had a will to that which was good, yet he wanted power, and had none of himself to perform; and therefore often did what he would not, and what he would he did not. Romans 7:20 rom 7:20 rom 7:20 rom 7:20Now if I do that I would not,.... The same conclusion is formed here, as in Rom 7:17, not with any view to excuse himself from blame in sinning, but to trace the lusts of his heart, and the sins of his life, to the source and fountain of them, the corruption of his nature; and to ascribe them to the proper cause of them, which was not the law of God, nor the new man, but sin that dwelt in him.”

“For the good that I would I do not - Here again is the most decisive proof that the will is on the side of God and truth. But the evil which I would not - And here is equally decisive proof that the will is against, or opposed to evil. There is not a man in ten millions, who will carefully watch the operations of this faculty, that will find it opposed to good and obstinately attached to evil, as is generally supposed. Nay, it is found almost uniformly on God's side, while the whole sensual system is against him. - It is not the Will that leads men astray; but the corrupt Passions which oppose and oppress the will. It is truly astonishing into what endless mistakes men have fallen on this point, and what systems of divinity have been built on these mistakes. The will, this almost only friend to God in the human soul, has been slandered as God's worst enemy, and even by those who had the seventh chapter to the Romans before their eyes! Nay, it has been considered so fell a foe to God and goodness that it is bound in the adamantine chains of a dire necessity to do evil only; and the doctrine of will (absurdly called free will, as if will did not essentially imply what is free) has been considered one of the most destructive heresies. Let such persons put themselves to school to their Bibles and to common sense. The plain state of the case is this: the soul is so completely fallen, that it has no power to do good till it receive that power from on high. But it has power to see good, to distinguish between that and evil; to acknowledge the excellence of this good, and to will it, from a conviction of that excellence; but farther it cannot go. Yet, in various cases, it is solicited and consents to sin; and because it is will, that is, because it is a free principle, it must necessarily possess this power; and although it can do no good unless it receive grace from God, yet it is impossible to force it to sin. Even Satan himself cannot do this; and before he can get it to sin, he must gain its consent. Thus God in his endless mercy has endued this faculty with a power in which, humanly speaking, resides the salvability of the soul; and without this the soul must have eternally continued under the power of sin, or been saved as an inert, absolutely passive machine; which supposition would go as nearly to prove that it was as incapable of vice as it were of virtue. "But does not this arguing destroy the doctrine of free grace?" No! it establishes that doctrine. 1. It is through the grace, the unmerited kindness, of God, that the soul has such a faculty, and that it has not been extinguished by sin. 2. This will, though a free principle, as it respects its nilling of evil and choosing good, yet, properly speaking, has no power by which it can subjugate the evil or perform the good. We know that the eye has a power to discern objects, but without light this power is perfectly useless, and no object can be discerned by it. So, of the person represented here by the apostle, it is said, To will is present with me, το γαρ θελειν παρακειται μοι. To will is ever in readiness, it is ever at hand, it lies constantly before me; but how to perform that which is good, I find not; that is, the man is unregenerate, and he is seeking justification and holiness from the law. The law was never designed to give these - it gives the knowledge, not the cure of sin; therefore, though he nills evil and wills good, yet he can neither conquer the one nor perform the other till he receives the grace of Christ, till he seeks and finds redemption in his blood. Here, then, the free agency of man is preserved, without which he could not be in a salvable state; and the honor of the grace of Christ is maintained, without which there can be no actual salvation. There is a good sentiment on this subject in the following words of an eminent poet: - Thou great first Cause, least understood; Who all my sense confined To know but this, that thou art good; And that myself am blind. Yet gave me in this dark estate To see the good from ill; And binding nature fast in fate, Left free the human will. Pope's Universal Prayer.”

“For, &c.--The conflict here graphically described between a self that "desires" to do good and a self that in spite of this does evil, cannot be the struggles between conscience and passion in the unregenerate, because the description given of this "desire to do good" in Rom 7:22 is such as cannot be ascribed, with the least show of truth, to any but the renewed.”