Galatians 3:15
This page isn't yet indexed by search engines.
Paul uses a human example not to equate God with flawed humanity, but to highlight God's absolute faithfulness by contrast. Even a simple man-made agreement, once finalized, cannot be altered without injustice; this underscores how infinitely more binding God's covenant is, implying that no subsequent decree could ever invalidate a promise He has already ratified.
To give a human example, brothers: even with a man-made covenant, no one annuls it or adds to it once it has been ratified.
English Standard Version (ESV)
Paul is arguing that the promise God made to Abraham, which is the basis of our salvation, is unbreakable. He uses a common human agreement as an analogy: once a contract is ratified, it can't be changed or annulled. This principle, he implies, is even more true for God's covenant promise, which the later Law cannot possibly invalidate.
Ever dealt with a contract that got messed with? Or a promise that felt like it had hidden fine print added later? Paul uses a common human example to show how different God's promises are.
Paul draws an analogy from everyday human agreements. When a contract between people is properly signed and ratified, it's legally binding. No one can just tear it up or add new rules to it later. It's confirmed and stands as it is. Paul uses this as a stepping stone to talk about God's covenant with Abraham. If even human agreements are meant to be firm, how much more so is God's promise, which is eternal and perfect?
Paul is dealing with people who think the Law of Moses is the key to Abraham's blessing. But he's about to show why that's like trying to add a new rule to an already final contract.
The core of Paul's argument here is that God's promise to Abraham, made centuries before the Law, was complete and unchangeable. The Law, which came much later, didn't come to alter or add conditions to that original promise. If it did, it would be like someone trying to change a ratified human contract. The promise to Abraham was a free gift, received by faith, and the Law, with its demands and conditions, couldn't undo or modify that foundational grace. It highlights a crucial difference: the promise is based on God's faithfulness, not human obedience.
Understand the original words
Ask a follow-up
diathēkē · Greek Noun
A solemn, binding agreement or promise between parties. Biblically, it refers to the formal arrangements God makes with humanity, characterized by unconditional faithfulness on His part and requiring response from the people.
Paul uses the analogy of a human legal agreement to underscore that God's original promise to Abraham, which pointed to Christ, could not be annulled or altered by the later Mosaic Law. The Law, given centuries after the promise, could not invalidate the foundational, grace-based covenant established with Abraham.
c. 2000 BC
God's Covenant with Abraham
God establishes a foundational covenant with Abraham, promising him descendants, land, and that through him all nations would be blessed.
c. 1446 BC
The Exodus and the Giving of the Law
God delivers Israel from slavery in Egypt and gives them the Mosaic Law at Mount Sinai, establishing a new covenant relationship with the nation.
c. 970 BC
The Divided Kingdom
Following Solomon's reign, the united kingdom of Israel splits into the Northern Kingdom (Israel) and the Southern Kingdom (Judah), leading to increased idolatry and unfaithfulness.
c. 722 BC
Fall of the Northern Kingdom
The Assyrian Empire conquers the Northern Kingdom of Israel, scattering its people and leading to the loss of the ten tribes.
586 BC
Fall of Jerusalem and Babylonian Exile
The Babylonian Empire destroys Jerusalem and its Temple, exiling many of the remaining Judeans. This event marks a profound crisis in the understanding of God's covenant promises.
c. AD 48
Council of Jerusalem
The early church leaders debate whether Gentile believers must adhere to Mosaic Law. The council affirms that salvation comes through faith in Christ, not adherence to the Law.
c. AD 50-55— this verse
Paul writes Galatians
The Apostle Paul writes his letter to the churches in Galatia to combat the influence of 'Judaizers' who were teaching that believers needed to be circumcised and keep the Mosaic Law to be truly saved.
This passage describes the ratification of God's covenant with Abraham, establishing a foundational promise that Paul later uses as a basis for his argument about the immutability of God's word.
Genesis 22:15-19The reiteration of the promise to Abraham after the test of his faith underscores the unconditional nature of God's covenant, highlighting that it rests on God's faithfulness, not human performance.
Romans 4:13-16Paul draws a similar parallel between the law and the promise here, emphasizing that the promise to Abraham and his offspring was not through adherence to the law but through faith, which is crucial for understanding why adding conditions invalidates the original covenant.
Hebrews 6:13-17This passage illustrates God's commitment to His promises by referencing His oath to Abraham, further reinforcing the idea that God's covenants are unchangeable and sealed by divine authority, much like a human covenant once ratified.
Galatians 3:17This verse directly follows the passage in question and provides the specific application of the human covenant analogy: the law, given centuries later, cannot invalidate the prior promise to Abraham.
jfbGalatians 3:15: "Brethren, I speak after the manner of men; Though it be but a man's covenant, yet if it be confirmed, no man disannulleth, or addeth thereto."
- I speak after the manner of men—I take an illustration from a merely human transaction of everyday occurrence.but a man's covenant—whose purpose it is far less important to maintain.if it be confirmed—when once it hath been ratified.no man disannulleth—"none setteth aside," not even the author himself, much less any second party. Non…
vincentGalatians 3:15: "Brethren, I speak after the manner of men; Though it be but a man's covenant, yet if it be confirmed, no man disannulleth, or addeth thereto."
After the manner of men (κατὰ ἄνθρωπον)According to human analogy; reasoning as men would reason in ordinary affairs. The phrase is peculiar to Paul. See Romans 3:5; 1 Corinthians 3:3; 1 Corinthians 9:8; 1 Corinthians 15:32; Galatians 1:11. Comp. ἀνθρώπινος as a man, Romans 6:19.Though it be - yetThe A.V. and Rev. give the correct s…
Paul uses a human example not to equate God with flawed humanity, but to highlight God's absolute faithfulness by contrast. Even a simple man-made agreement, once finalized, cannot be altered without injustice; this underscores how infinitely more binding God's covenant is, implying that no subsequent decree could ever invalidate a promise He has already ratified.
Paul is arguing that the promise God made to Abraham, which is the basis of our salvation, is unbreakable. He uses a common human agreement as an analogy: once a contract is ratified, it can't be changed or annulled. This principle, he implies, is even more true for God's covenant promise, which the later Law cannot possibly invalidate.
Paul is arguing that the promise God made to Abraham, which is the basis of our salvation, is unbreakable. He uses a common human agreement as an analogy: once a contract is ratified, it can't be changed or annulled. This principle, he implies, is even more true for God's covenant promise, which the later Law cannot possibly invalidate.
"To give a human example, brothers: even with a man-made covenant, no one annuls it or adds to it once it has been ratified." — Paul uses a human example not to equate God with flawed humanity, but to highlight God's absolute faithfulness by contrast. Even a simple man-made agreement, once finalized, cannot be altered without…
Get the original Greek and Hebrew, verse-by-verse context, and related passages inside the app.
Last reviewed October 2026
