We are given a great deal of direction in how and what to pray for.

We are told, that “for your Father knoweth what things ye have need of, before ye ask him.” (Matt 6:8) and even the very hairs of our heads are numbered (Luke 12:7)

The D&C reminds us, “Remember that without faith you can do nothing; therefore ask in faith. Trifle not with these things; do not ask for that which you ought not.” (D&C 8:10)

Nephi says “Yea, I know that God will give liberally to him that asketh. Yea, my God will give me, if I ask not amiss”. (2^nd Ne. 4:35)

Similarly, James writes, “Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may consume it upon your lusts.” (James 4:3)

Of particular note, let us draw attention to D&C 88:63-65

“Draw near unto me and I will draw near unto you; seek me diligently and ye shall find me; ask, and ye shall receive; knock, and it shall be opened unto you.
Whatsoever ye ask the Father in my name it shall be given unto you, that is expedient for you;
And if ye ask anything that is not expedient for you, it shall turn unto your condemnation.”  (emphasis mine)

This is not a post about prayer. It is about the things we would be inclined to pray for. Even those things we would call needs.

God does not look at needs as we do. If we insist even on Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, as a bare minimum, we could be quite wrong. What should we call needs? Human Companionship? Moroni spent 36 years without companionship, so if that is a need, then either God does not care much about needs, or He takes a very different view of it. It is not unconcern, or callousness, but a very different prioritization than we may have.  Other examples of people put into or left in, difficult situations, is not hard to find in either scriptures or Christian history. 

When we insist on what we think are needs, but are not, then we are in the same position as praying for things we do not truly need. And if we are not very careful, it will be to our own condemnation. 

This is an interesting topic because it is seamlessly intertwined with the philosophy of Sex-First.

I have certainly been single long enough (and a single father of teenage daughters) that I can testify that “it is not good for man to be alone”. (Gen 2:18, Abr. 5:14) Sexual relations are an important part of a health married life, but at no point since the creation of Adam and Eve has sex been put as a high priority, not any more than eating has.

Following the hubbub of Elder Callister’s talk on sexual morality, there were several detractors. Among them, was the usually much better Natasha Helfer Parker.

Among many other things, she complains that it is not realistic or healthy to expect LGBTQ to be morally pure. It is too hard, and giving up too much. There are similar complaints about

This is the problem with modern philosophies that place sex first in both priority and identity. You are, of course, welcome to do that if you want, but as long as you do, the commandments will be an iron fetter to you. That fetter is the Wicked Traditions of our Fathers. (D&C 123:7-8)

We cannot keep the commandments when we insist and cling to, things we are sure must be needs. These may well turn to our condemnation.

What are our needs then? After the Savior had spent 40 days fasting, and legitimately needed to eat (a need if there ever was one), he was tempted by food. He replied simply and directly, “Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.” (Matt 4:4)