συνίστησι, (sunistesin) in Romans 3:5: Verb Third Person Singular Present Active Indicative

Verb: in this conditional premise, the form says that human unrighteousness displays or demonstrates God's righteousness by contrast.

Present: presents the demonstrating relationship as the premise now under discussion. It does not say that every sinful act continually produces a new divine quality.

Active: the grammatical subject, our unrighteousness, is presented as doing the demonstrating. Active voice does not turn that subject into something morally praiseworthy.

Indicative: states the premise within an if-clause so Paul can expose the mistaken conclusion that follows from it.

Third person: speaks about the singular subject ἡ ἀδικία rather than directly addressing the audience.

Not applicable: the finite verb itself has no case, while the surrounding noun forms identify subject and object.

Singular: agrees with the singular subject unrighteousness, even though the possessive ἡμῶν refers to us.

Not applicable: this finite verb does not mark gender.

The predicate joins the subject ἡ ἀδικία ἡμῶν, our unrighteousness, to the object Θεοῦ δικαιοσύνην, God's righteousness.

The conditional εἰ clause that introduces a human-style objection in Romans 3:5.

It asserts the objection's premise: human unrighteousness makes God's righteousness evident by contrast.

It does not praise unrighteousness, make God dependent on sin, or endorse the question that God is unjust to judge.

High: The predicate forms the premise of a serious objection about God's righteousness and judgment.

Conditional-clause present active predicate. asserts that human unrighteousness demonstrates God's righteousness. Attached to ἡ ἀδικία ἡμῶν as subject and Θεοῦ δικαιοσύνην as object. Governed by the εἰ condition in Romans 3:5. The syntax establishes a contrast within an objection, not approval of the unrighteousness.

Why does Paul mention human unrighteousness displaying God's righteousness? He is stating an objection's premise so he can reject the claim that God's judgment would therefore be unjust.

Direct: The active predicate directly supports highlights or demonstrates, with unrighteousness as its grammatical subject.

The lexical sense can include commendation elsewhere, but this subject and object call for demonstration by contrast. The present tense states the relationship under discussion without making it an endless process. The conditional premise is rhetorically entertained and must be interpreted with Paul's answer.

Demonstrates means morally commends: The clause describes what the contrast makes evident; it does not label unrighteousness good. conditional premise equals Paul's doctrine: Follow the objection through the question and the emphatic rejection in verse 6. active voice makes sin necessary for God: Grammatical agency in this sentence does not establish metaphysical dependence or divine need.

Romans 3:5 places συνίστησι after Θεοῦ δικαιοσύνην and marks it V-PAI-3S within the clause beginning εἰ.

The lemma συνίστημι can commend, establish, or demonstrate. The subject-object relationship here favors the sense that unrighteousness highlights God's righteousness.

Singular agreement points back to ἡ ἀδικία, the active construction presents that subject as demonstrating the object, and the conditional frame marks the statement as the premise of an objection.

Paul voices a human objection that God's righteousness becomes clearer against human wrong, then rejects the inference that God is therefore unjust to judge the world.

Romans 3 consistently defends God's faithfulness and righteous judgment while placing all people under sin; the conditional reasoning must serve that argument.

Trace the sentence in order: premise, mistaken question, Paul's human-terms warning, and the decisive rejection in verse 6.

Do not infer that sin becomes good because it displays a contrast, or that the present active form validates the objector's conclusion.