Doctrine & Covenants 74 Overview Outline
Overview
Date of Revelation: 1830
Location: Wayne County, New York
Recipient(s): Joseph Smith the Prophet
Section Summary: This revelation offers an inspired clarification of 1 Corinthians 7:14 and the early Christian struggle over whether to retain the Mosaic law, particularly circumcision. It addresses the sanctity of children and refutes the belief that children are born unholy or in need of ritual purification through Mosaic ordinances.
Timeframe & Setting
Received before the formal organization of the Church in 1830.
Questions regarding infant baptism and circumcision were already present among early Saints.
This section was recorded to resolve theological confusion stemming from Paul's statement about children being "unclean."
Key Circumstances
Misunderstanding of 1 Corinthians 7:14 led to doctrinal disputes regarding:
Whether a believing spouse sanctifies an unbelieving one.
The holiness of children born into mixed-belief households.
The justification of infant baptism using Paul’s writings.
Early Christians, particularly those with Jewish heritage, were divided on whether the Law of Moses—including circumcision—still applied.
Purpose of the Revelation
To clarify that Paul’s counsel was to prevent children from being raised under the Law of Moses and its now-fulfilled ordinances.
To affirm that little children are inherently holy, being sanctified through the Atonement of Christ.
To emphasize the discontinuation of circumcision as a religious obligation.
Significance
Doctrinally rebukes the idea of inherited impurity in children.
Reinforces Restoration doctrine that infant baptism is unnecessary, echoing teachings later found in Mosiah 3 and Moroni 8.
Establishes a consistent rejection of Mosaic legalism in favor of New Covenant grace.
Clarifies Paul’s authorship and apostolic agency when offering counsel not directly from the Lord.
D&C 74:1 — Sanctification Within Marriage & Children’s Holiness
Verse 1
1 For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband; else were your children unclean, but now are they holy.
Summary
This verse echoes the language of 1 Corinthians 7:14 and affirms the early Christian belief that covenantal faithfulness within marriage has sanctifying power—not only for spouses, but also for children. The concern here is spiritual inheritance: if one spouse is faithful, their covenant relationship invites holiness into the family. The conclusion is bold: “now are your children holy.”
This sets the foundation for rejecting infant baptism based on inherited guilt. Instead, it affirms the innocence and sanctity of children under the New Covenant, made effective through Christ's Atonement.
Language & Cultural Insights
Sanctified Greek: ἡγίασται (hēgiastai) — perfect passive of hagiazō, meaning “to make holy, to set apart for God.” In Hebrew, the counterpart would be קָדַשׁ (qāḏaš) — to consecrate or declare holy. → This implies divine action: it’s not just moral goodness, but a status of being ritually or covenantally set apart.
Holy (ἅγιοι / קָדוֹשׁ) Children are described as holy (Greek: hagios, Hebrew: קָדוֹשׁ – qādôsh), not through circumcision or inherited law, but by their relation to the believing parent and ultimately the atonement of Christ (see v. 7).
Unclean / Clean Jewish purity laws (esp. Leviticus 7, 12, and 15) governed family purity and often declared those outside covenant law as “unclean” (ἀκάθαρτος akáthartos, טָמֵא ṭâmêʼ). Paul and Joseph Smith both reject the implication that children, by nature, are impure or require purification by rites like circumcision or infant baptism.
Cross-References
1 Corinthians 7:14 (KJV): “...else were your children unclean; but now are they holy.”
Mosiah 3:16, 19: “Little children are blameless...”
Moroni 8:8–9: “Little children need no repentance... baptism is unto repentance...”
Doctrine & Covenants 137:10: “All who have died without a knowledge of this gospel... are heirs of the celestial kingdom.”
Reflection Questions
How does this verse challenge traditions that presume the spiritual guilt of children?
In what ways can our personal faith and covenants sanctify those closest to us?
How does the idea of “sanctified by the spouse” shift our view of eternal marriage and its redemptive power?
D&C 74:2–4 — Jewish Tradition, Circumcision, and Gospel Conflict
Verses 2-4
2 “Now, in the days of the apostles the law of circumcision was had among all the Jews who believed not the gospel of Jesus Christ.
3 And it came to pass that there arose a great contention among the people concerning the law of circumcision, for the unbelieving husband was desirous that his children should be circumcised and become subject to the law of Moses, which law was fulfilled.
4 And it came to pass that the children, being brought up in subjection to the law of Moses, gave heed to the traditions of their fathers and believed not the gospel of Christ, wherein they became unholy.”
Summary
These verses explain how ancient Christian households wrestled with mixed beliefs between Jewish and Christian parents. Paul’s counsel was practical and doctrinal: don’t let unbelieving spouses reimpose the Law of Moses (specifically circumcision) upon children. The law had been fulfilled, and returning to it symbolized spiritual regression.
The concern is generational: if the children are raised under old covenant customs (i.e., Mosaic law), they may reject the gospel and thereby become “unholy”—not ritually, but spiritually alienated from Christ.
Language & Cultural Insights
Circumcision Hebrew: מוּל (mûl) — to cut, circumcise. In Judaism, circumcision (ברית מילה brit milah) was the sign of the Abrahamic covenant (see Genesis 17:10–12).
In early Christianity, it became a point of controversy, especially as Gentiles entered the faith (see Acts 15, Galatians 5).
Subjection to the Law of Moses Hebrew: עֲבֹדָה (avodah) implies service, work, or bondage. Paul taught that those who submit again to the law (after Christ) place themselves under a yoke that Christ has already lifted (see Galatians 5:1–4).
Traditions of their fathers This echoes Alma’s language: “[the traditions of their fathers]... caused them to remain in their state of ignorance” (Alma 9:16). The phrase reflects not only culture, but also a spiritual lineage—beliefs inherited rather than chosen.
Unholy (Hebrew: חָלַל chalal) Means to profane or defile what was once holy. Children raised in Mosaic subjection are considered "unholy" not by nature, but by deviation from the gospel path. Holiness is relational and covenantal, not just ritualistic.
Cross-References
Acts 15:1–11: Apostolic council on circumcision
Galatians 5:1–6: “Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law…”
Colossians 2:11: “...circumcision made without hands”
Alma 9:16: traditions of the fathers
2 Nephi 25:27: Law fulfilled in Christ
Reflection Questions
What spiritual risks arise from mixing gospel truth with cultural or religious tradition?
How can we identify whether a practice we’ve inherited supports or hinders faith in Christ?
What is the difference between being “unholy” ritually vs. relationally?
D&C 74:5–7 — Paul’s Counsel and Christ’s Atonement for Children
Verse 5-7
5 Wherefore, for this cause the apostle wrote unto the church, giving unto them a commandment, not of the Lord, but of himself, that a believer should not be united to an unbeliever; except the law of Moses should be done away among them,
6 That their children might remain without circumcision; and that the tradition might be done away, which saith that little children are unholy; for it was had among the Jews;
7 But little children are holy, being sanctified through the atonement of Jesus Christ; and this is what the scriptures mean.
Summary
Paul’s counsel was practical: mixed marriages with unbelievers—especially those who clung to the Law of Moses—threatened the spiritual nurture of children in the early Church. His guidance was personal, not a direct command from Christ, yet inspired by pastoral concern.
The focus of the passage culminates in verse 7: Little children are holy, not because of circumcision or ritual law, but through the atonement of Jesus Christ. This is a foundational Latter-day Saint doctrine—that children are innocent, without sin, and do not need baptism until accountable (see Moroni 8:8–12).
Language & Cultural Insights
“A commandment, not of the Lord, but of himself” This clarifies Paul’s authorship of certain teachings in 1 Corinthians 7:14. He distinguishes between what is divinely revealed and what is wise pastoral counsel for a particular circumstance.
“Little children are holy” Hebrew: קָדוֹשׁ (qadosh) — set apart, sacred, morally pure. This counters any notion that children are born sinful. Compare this doctrine with infant baptismal theology from other Christian traditions.
Sanctified (Greek: ἁγιάζω hagiazō) Means to be made holy, consecrated, purified. Often used in NT passages referring to the work of Christ on behalf of believers (John 17:17, Hebrews 10:10).
Through the atonement of Jesus Christ Hebrew: kipur, kapparah (כַּפָּרָה) — atonement, covering, reconciliation. This concept lies at the heart of Latter-day Saint theology: Christ’s atonement fully covers innocent children and those not accountable.
Cross-References
1 Corinthians 7:14: “...else were your children unclean; but now are they holy.”
Moroni 8:8–12: Infant baptism is a denial of the mercies of Christ.
Mosiah 3:16,19: Children are “blameless before God.”
Doctrine & Covenants 29:46–47: “Little children are redeemed from the foundation of the world.”
Reflection Questions
What does it mean to be “sanctified through the atonement” rather than by outward observance?
How does this passage clarify the Lord’s view of innocence and accountability?
In what ways does this teaching differ from or support doctrines in other Christian denominations?