What do you think?
Rate this book
Single Ever After: A Biblical Vision for the Significance of Singleness
An encouraging, empowering biblical perspective on the significance of singleness.Singleness is often viewed as a “plan B” by our culture and the church, and sometimes by single people who feel they’re missing out on their “happy ever after”. Author Dani Treweek offers a thought-provoking reframing of popular conversations around singleness.
Rich, nuanced, and witty, Single Ever After is an uplifting read that debunks some of the misconceptions surrounding singleness, marriage, and meaning. By diving deeply into key Bible passages, it answers questions such as “Does my singleness have a purpose?” “What actually is the gift of singleness?” and “Is marriage the only solution to feeling lonely?”
Reorienting you to the biblical significance of singleness, Treweek shows how the abundant life Jesus promises his followers applies to all believers. She highlights how both marriage and singleness serve as unique signposts to our eternal future—one where together we'll be married to Christ while as individuals we'll be "single ever after".
Whatever your relationship status and however you currently feel about it, this biblical perspective on singleness will encourage and empower you. Married Christians will also learn more about how to help make church a community where single brothers and sisters thrive.
Rich, nuanced, and witty, Single Ever After is an uplifting read that debunks some of the misconceptions surrounding singleness, marriage, and meaning. By diving deeply into key Bible passages, it answers questions such as “Does my singleness have a purpose?” “What actually is the gift of singleness?” and “Is marriage the only solution to feeling lonely?”
Reorienting you to the biblical significance of singleness, Treweek shows how the abundant life Jesus promises his followers applies to all believers. She highlights how both marriage and singleness serve as unique signposts to our eternal future—one where together we'll be married to Christ while as individuals we'll be "single ever after".
Whatever your relationship status and however you currently feel about it, this biblical perspective on singleness will encourage and empower you. Married Christians will also learn more about how to help make church a community where single brothers and sisters thrive.
183 pages, Kindle Edition
Published September 16, 2025
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 75 reviews
June 1, 2026
I loved this book! It gives such a honest and necessary perspective for singleness earth side, but also speaks to the reality that “singleness” is the way we will spend eternity when we are the bride of Christ in Heaven.
There were very practical applications and acknowledgments for single people and married friends wanting to support their single friends. I think books like this are so valuable for dating and married people to read. Knowing how to best support and encourage all Church members is what we should be striving for! I also thought this book was unique in including “single again” Christians who may have lost their spouse. That will statistically be half of married people, so why don’t we hear more about this?!
Some of my main takeaways included that women are not more feminine or womanly by becoming wives or mothers. These roles feel so inherently feminine to our culture, however women who do not or do not yet embody these roles are not immature or less of a Christian woman. Additionally, the importance of physical touch and invitation into mundane tasks for single people!! Hug your friends!! Invite them to do nothing together!
Consuming media on Christian singleness has truly been life shaping for me over the past couple years 🫶🏼🫶🏼
There were very practical applications and acknowledgments for single people and married friends wanting to support their single friends. I think books like this are so valuable for dating and married people to read. Knowing how to best support and encourage all Church members is what we should be striving for! I also thought this book was unique in including “single again” Christians who may have lost their spouse. That will statistically be half of married people, so why don’t we hear more about this?!
Some of my main takeaways included that women are not more feminine or womanly by becoming wives or mothers. These roles feel so inherently feminine to our culture, however women who do not or do not yet embody these roles are not immature or less of a Christian woman. Additionally, the importance of physical touch and invitation into mundane tasks for single people!! Hug your friends!! Invite them to do nothing together!
Consuming media on Christian singleness has truly been life shaping for me over the past couple years 🫶🏼🫶🏼
Read
October 23, 2025A spontaneous pickup, inspired by Michael’s addition to her TBR (I trust your book recs wholeheartedly!!).
this may be my most unhinged review yet as I am so very sleepy and I don’t think I can speak of singleness with any real seriousness, perhaps because it lives somewhere deep in the recesses of my heart and I am not ready to talk about it. or i just don't want to talk about it.
Let us begin with the topsoil of this reading experience: I listened to the audiobook in full, narrated by the author herself. I told myself that I wouldn’t take notes and would just give it a clean listen through. That did not happen.
subsoil spitfire:
- I do not, in fact, possess the “gift of singleness.”
- Churches should speak more openly about how to express physical affection within community—safe, loving, embodied ways of touch that honor our humanity.
- Marriage is not the express lane to sanctification nor the fast track to holiness. (1 Cor 7:32-25)
- Viewing the church (and its adjacent social circles) as a “marital marketplace” is not inherently wrong (i am guilty of this), but it becomes distorted when we forget that the opposite sex are, first and foremost, brothers and sisters in Christ—fellow heirs of a future reality where the eternal union is not marital but communal.
- I believe I will see the goodness of the Lord in the land of the living. I believe I already do. The Lord is so good. I long to see, in particular, the goodness of singleness.
- Lord, guard me from resenting this season or missing the opportunity to give my all in singleness to the One who gave His all for me. Let me remember that serving You is not a burden but a joy —and please keep me from accidentally slipping into a works-based faith while you teach me this hahahahahahahaha
- “The enduring relationship of resurrected men and women will not be husbands and wives, but brothers and sisters in Christ.” (brother and sister is referred to over 100 times in NT)
random thoughts/feelings/wonderings in the bedrock:
- I am afraid to speak about singleness—it feels like im complaining, and to complain feels like a failure of contentment. Yet to enjoy singleness too much also feels like a violation, as if delighting in this state is self-indulgent. The author names this tension well: for singleness to be “acceptable,” it must also appear "austere." A single person may enjoy aspects of life but once that joy seems to flow from their singleness there can come the side glances, the quiet judgments. Married people are often permitted to revel in their marriage, to name their joys freely. But the single person’s joy, particularly in the form of time, rest, or autonomy, is almost viewed with suspicion—as though contentment itself becomes rebellion??? There is an uneven standard here, a moral asymmetry between the single and the married.
- Relating to the previous point, the author names that marriage is often understood as both instrumentally and intrinsically good. Two lives joining can yield fruitful ministry, deeper love, wider service. But the union itself is also seen as inherently meaningful, even apart from its productivity. Singleness, by contrast, is often viewed as meaningful only when spent well—something that must earn its significance through usefulness. But the author names that singleness, like marriage, bears inherent worth. Its meaning is not merely derived, but bestowed upon the God who dignifies and consecrates both union and aloneness as reflections of His own divine communion.
- I also think married couples should be more intentionally taught how to love their single friends. I understand (or try to) that their lives are intertwined in a different cadence—two made one, tending to shared responsibilities—but that reality doesn’t erase the eternal one: husband and wife is not a forever title. I often find myself serving my married friends joyfully—running errands, accommodating schedules—but this book helped me name the quiet ache of relational imbalance. A loneliness compounded by self-sufficiency and inwardness. The author articulates it beautifully:
“Don’t tell single friends to just be content in Jesus when you won’t lift a finger to do what Jesus cannot do for me right now. Give me a hug. Eat with me. Help me not only see my singleness as good, but experience it as good.”
- I will not question the providence of the Lord in aligning the reading of this book with my concurrent devotional reading of Song of Songs (longing, yearning, push pull, will they wont they, passion, right person wrong timing) while I too hopelessly linger in the ache of what feels like incomplete love. more on this in person if whoever is reading this is curious.
This was my first book on singleness and I'm sure not my last. I appreciate the author’s refusal to speak into a silo. Her words reached outward, embracing the married, the formerly married, the widowed, the single parent, the unexpectedly alone, the pastor navigating both halves of the pew. In her vision, singleness was not a demographic but a dimension of the Church’s shared identity. the beloved Bride in all her seasons, still being made ready.
No star rating (for now). I can’t sift through topical (dis)interest, feeling seen, challenged, and slightly exposed—in a good, uncomfortable, sanctifying kind of way???
this may be my most unhinged review yet as I am so very sleepy and I don’t think I can speak of singleness with any real seriousness, perhaps because it lives somewhere deep in the recesses of my heart and I am not ready to talk about it. or i just don't want to talk about it.
Let us begin with the topsoil of this reading experience: I listened to the audiobook in full, narrated by the author herself. I told myself that I wouldn’t take notes and would just give it a clean listen through. That did not happen.
subsoil spitfire:
- I do not, in fact, possess the “gift of singleness.”
- Churches should speak more openly about how to express physical affection within community—safe, loving, embodied ways of touch that honor our humanity.
- Marriage is not the express lane to sanctification nor the fast track to holiness. (1 Cor 7:32-25)
- Viewing the church (and its adjacent social circles) as a “marital marketplace” is not inherently wrong (i am guilty of this), but it becomes distorted when we forget that the opposite sex are, first and foremost, brothers and sisters in Christ—fellow heirs of a future reality where the eternal union is not marital but communal.
- I believe I will see the goodness of the Lord in the land of the living. I believe I already do. The Lord is so good. I long to see, in particular, the goodness of singleness.
- Lord, guard me from resenting this season or missing the opportunity to give my all in singleness to the One who gave His all for me. Let me remember that serving You is not a burden but a joy —and please keep me from accidentally slipping into a works-based faith while you teach me this hahahahahahahaha
- “The enduring relationship of resurrected men and women will not be husbands and wives, but brothers and sisters in Christ.” (brother and sister is referred to over 100 times in NT)
random thoughts/feelings/wonderings in the bedrock:
- I am afraid to speak about singleness—it feels like im complaining, and to complain feels like a failure of contentment. Yet to enjoy singleness too much also feels like a violation, as if delighting in this state is self-indulgent. The author names this tension well: for singleness to be “acceptable,” it must also appear "austere." A single person may enjoy aspects of life but once that joy seems to flow from their singleness there can come the side glances, the quiet judgments. Married people are often permitted to revel in their marriage, to name their joys freely. But the single person’s joy, particularly in the form of time, rest, or autonomy, is almost viewed with suspicion—as though contentment itself becomes rebellion??? There is an uneven standard here, a moral asymmetry between the single and the married.
- Relating to the previous point, the author names that marriage is often understood as both instrumentally and intrinsically good. Two lives joining can yield fruitful ministry, deeper love, wider service. But the union itself is also seen as inherently meaningful, even apart from its productivity. Singleness, by contrast, is often viewed as meaningful only when spent well—something that must earn its significance through usefulness. But the author names that singleness, like marriage, bears inherent worth. Its meaning is not merely derived, but bestowed upon the God who dignifies and consecrates both union and aloneness as reflections of His own divine communion.
- I also think married couples should be more intentionally taught how to love their single friends. I understand (or try to) that their lives are intertwined in a different cadence—two made one, tending to shared responsibilities—but that reality doesn’t erase the eternal one: husband and wife is not a forever title. I often find myself serving my married friends joyfully—running errands, accommodating schedules—but this book helped me name the quiet ache of relational imbalance. A loneliness compounded by self-sufficiency and inwardness. The author articulates it beautifully:
“Don’t tell single friends to just be content in Jesus when you won’t lift a finger to do what Jesus cannot do for me right now. Give me a hug. Eat with me. Help me not only see my singleness as good, but experience it as good.”
- I will not question the providence of the Lord in aligning the reading of this book with my concurrent devotional reading of Song of Songs (longing, yearning, push pull, will they wont they, passion, right person wrong timing) while I too hopelessly linger in the ache of what feels like incomplete love. more on this in person if whoever is reading this is curious.
This was my first book on singleness and I'm sure not my last. I appreciate the author’s refusal to speak into a silo. Her words reached outward, embracing the married, the formerly married, the widowed, the single parent, the unexpectedly alone, the pastor navigating both halves of the pew. In her vision, singleness was not a demographic but a dimension of the Church’s shared identity. the beloved Bride in all her seasons, still being made ready.
No star rating (for now). I can’t sift through topical (dis)interest, feeling seen, challenged, and slightly exposed—in a good, uncomfortable, sanctifying kind of way???
Read
October 1, 2025This book was really insightful for me. The author is single and well into adulthood, and this is her second book on the topic. You can tell she has researched it well, has much scholarship on the subject, and has looked to the Bible to show how we can form a biblical view of singleness. I was impressed on that front.
The book reads easily and has a nice flow to it, and Danielle even adds in a little humor. Much of it is framed around myths and misconceptions about singleness, and one of my favorite chapters was on the commonly used term “the gift of singleness.”
She also shared some of the struggles and insecurities that singles in the church face, such as reluctance to share burdens, feeling like an inconvenience to their married brothers and sisters in Christ, and feeling like maintaining friendships often falls mainly on singles.
As a married person who has been married since fresh out of college, and whose interactions in the church have been from that perspective, I really appreciated hearing about these things. It caused me to reflect on how I relate to singles in my local church and consider some practical ways I could grow in this area.
I also appreciated how the author highlighted the value of both singleness and marriage, and how the goal in either season is to glorify the Lord and point to eternity no matter your relationship status.
While the book talks a lot directly to singles, it is written for both married and single readers. I found it very insightful, and I think if singleness is a topic you want to dive into a little more, this book is worth picking up. It is interesting, encouraging, and a quick read.
I received a complimentary copy as a reviewer, and all opinions shared are my own.
The book reads easily and has a nice flow to it, and Danielle even adds in a little humor. Much of it is framed around myths and misconceptions about singleness, and one of my favorite chapters was on the commonly used term “the gift of singleness.”
She also shared some of the struggles and insecurities that singles in the church face, such as reluctance to share burdens, feeling like an inconvenience to their married brothers and sisters in Christ, and feeling like maintaining friendships often falls mainly on singles.
As a married person who has been married since fresh out of college, and whose interactions in the church have been from that perspective, I really appreciated hearing about these things. It caused me to reflect on how I relate to singles in my local church and consider some practical ways I could grow in this area.
I also appreciated how the author highlighted the value of both singleness and marriage, and how the goal in either season is to glorify the Lord and point to eternity no matter your relationship status.
While the book talks a lot directly to singles, it is written for both married and single readers. I found it very insightful, and I think if singleness is a topic you want to dive into a little more, this book is worth picking up. It is interesting, encouraging, and a quick read.
I received a complimentary copy as a reviewer, and all opinions shared are my own.
May 8, 2026
Whew — not sure where to start with this one. While I appreciate what Treweek is attempting to do here, I think ultimately the underlying issue I had with it is that her eschatology is overrealized and focused on people more than on God Himself.
The whole premise of this book is that singleness is good and points us to eternity (just like marriage) because none of us will be married to one another in eternity. She pits this “intrinsic” view of singleness against the “instrumental” view that singleness is good because of how it is used for the kingdom. While it’s true that human, earthly marriage isn’t ultimate and that none of us will be married to each other in eternity, I think that taken to an extreme this view sidesteps some of the things we see in Scripture as a whole. A few points:
1) We see marriage explicitly explained as representing Christ and the church. We know marriage points us to eternity because it is a type and shadow of the true and perfect marriage to come, that of Christ to His bride the church. We don’t see singleness described this way. Despite Treweek’s interpretation of 1 Corinthians 7, I do lean more toward the traditional interpretation, namely that singleness is good because of how God uses it for His kingdom. I’m just not convinced that this passage can be stretched to support Treweek’s “intrinsic” view.
2) I do actually think Treweek is right that singleness points us to eternity — just not for the same reasons she purports. I believe the unfulfilled desire for marriage that very often accompanies singleness can point us to eternity by causing the single Christian to find all of their joy, satisfaction, and fulfillment of their longings in Christ alone, both now in joyfully receiving the good gift of singleness He has given them for their good and His glory, and by looking forward to the final day when their desire for marriage is completely found in Christ’s marriage to His bride in the new creation.
3) I think that Treweek’s focus on the fact that we will not be married to each other in the new creation causes an elevation of singleness over marriage, as if singles are living now as we all will live then. Besides this seeming like an overrealized eschatology, I think it also focuses too much on relationships between creatures rather than on our relationship with the Creator. Yes, it’s true that Jesus says none will marry or be given in marriage in heaven, but we see a greater emphasis in Scripture on eternity as a marriage between Christ and the church than we see regarding our relationships with one another in eternity.
4) Earthly marriage now is a picture and shadow of the final marriage of Christ and the church, and we see this institution established at creation, before the fall, in the creation of man and woman. We see marriage held in high regard and commended throughout Scripture as good and desirable (not negating that singleness is also good and sanctified for God’s glory). We see the final culmination of why marriage is such a good thing in Revelation when the types and shadows of earthly marriage fall away because the real thing, the marriage of the church to Christ, has come. This is what we all long for, whether single or married, and so the longings of unmarried AND married Christians will be totally satisfied on that day.
While Treweek had some good things to say, especially regarding the “gift of singleness,” I didn’t find her hermeneutics very consistent or convincing, and am just not convinced of her eschatological view of singleness that ends up downplaying the creational design for marriage in the here and now. On the contrary, I think marriage is the norm, and we don’t have to deny this to justify being single. God has also called singleness good through the apostle Paul, and He has ordained each person’s circumstances for His glory and our good, and He is utterly worthy of our trust.
The whole premise of this book is that singleness is good and points us to eternity (just like marriage) because none of us will be married to one another in eternity. She pits this “intrinsic” view of singleness against the “instrumental” view that singleness is good because of how it is used for the kingdom. While it’s true that human, earthly marriage isn’t ultimate and that none of us will be married to each other in eternity, I think that taken to an extreme this view sidesteps some of the things we see in Scripture as a whole. A few points:
1) We see marriage explicitly explained as representing Christ and the church. We know marriage points us to eternity because it is a type and shadow of the true and perfect marriage to come, that of Christ to His bride the church. We don’t see singleness described this way. Despite Treweek’s interpretation of 1 Corinthians 7, I do lean more toward the traditional interpretation, namely that singleness is good because of how God uses it for His kingdom. I’m just not convinced that this passage can be stretched to support Treweek’s “intrinsic” view.
2) I do actually think Treweek is right that singleness points us to eternity — just not for the same reasons she purports. I believe the unfulfilled desire for marriage that very often accompanies singleness can point us to eternity by causing the single Christian to find all of their joy, satisfaction, and fulfillment of their longings in Christ alone, both now in joyfully receiving the good gift of singleness He has given them for their good and His glory, and by looking forward to the final day when their desire for marriage is completely found in Christ’s marriage to His bride in the new creation.
3) I think that Treweek’s focus on the fact that we will not be married to each other in the new creation causes an elevation of singleness over marriage, as if singles are living now as we all will live then. Besides this seeming like an overrealized eschatology, I think it also focuses too much on relationships between creatures rather than on our relationship with the Creator. Yes, it’s true that Jesus says none will marry or be given in marriage in heaven, but we see a greater emphasis in Scripture on eternity as a marriage between Christ and the church than we see regarding our relationships with one another in eternity.
4) Earthly marriage now is a picture and shadow of the final marriage of Christ and the church, and we see this institution established at creation, before the fall, in the creation of man and woman. We see marriage held in high regard and commended throughout Scripture as good and desirable (not negating that singleness is also good and sanctified for God’s glory). We see the final culmination of why marriage is such a good thing in Revelation when the types and shadows of earthly marriage fall away because the real thing, the marriage of the church to Christ, has come. This is what we all long for, whether single or married, and so the longings of unmarried AND married Christians will be totally satisfied on that day.
While Treweek had some good things to say, especially regarding the “gift of singleness,” I didn’t find her hermeneutics very consistent or convincing, and am just not convinced of her eschatological view of singleness that ends up downplaying the creational design for marriage in the here and now. On the contrary, I think marriage is the norm, and we don’t have to deny this to justify being single. God has also called singleness good through the apostle Paul, and He has ordained each person’s circumstances for His glory and our good, and He is utterly worthy of our trust.
April 8, 2026
Danielle Treweek does an excellent job clearly defining a theology for singleness in light of eternity and God’s redemption story of his people. Married or single we should have undivided focus on the Lord. Thank you Lord for letting us be a part of your story of restoring your creation to you.
January 4, 2026
This was my favorite read of 2025! What an incredible resource not just for single people, but for the whole church.
It paints a beautiful picture of the family of God with glimpses of what singleness and marriage both picture eternally, upholding and honoring both together.
A couple of my favorite quotes:
"Married and single Christians have different specialty focus...we are complimentary -rather than competing - co-specialists in eternity. We so often get this wrong. For some reason, we tend to think of marriage and singleness as opponents. We think that to speaker honorably about one means we must diminish the honor of the other....but the glorious future awaiting us is one in which marriage and singleness will perfectly coexist. The church will delight in her marriage to Christ, and we, as individual members of the church, will delight in our unmarried relationships with one another. Both situations are instrumentally good in this life. And both situations are intrinsically good because of the life to come."
"Being unmarried is not the same as being alone... singleness should never be another word for loneliness within the community of God's people: those who Jesus prayed would be one."
"Friend, our marriage and single ever after is coming. So whatever your situation in life, stand firm alongside your brothers and sisters in Christ. Let nothing move you or divide your devotion. Give yourself fully to the Lord and his concerns. And know that whether you have a spouse or do not have a spouse or no longer have a spouse, your labor in the Lord is not in vain."
It paints a beautiful picture of the family of God with glimpses of what singleness and marriage both picture eternally, upholding and honoring both together.
A couple of my favorite quotes:
"Married and single Christians have different specialty focus...we are complimentary -rather than competing - co-specialists in eternity. We so often get this wrong. For some reason, we tend to think of marriage and singleness as opponents. We think that to speaker honorably about one means we must diminish the honor of the other....but the glorious future awaiting us is one in which marriage and singleness will perfectly coexist. The church will delight in her marriage to Christ, and we, as individual members of the church, will delight in our unmarried relationships with one another. Both situations are instrumentally good in this life. And both situations are intrinsically good because of the life to come."
"Being unmarried is not the same as being alone... singleness should never be another word for loneliness within the community of God's people: those who Jesus prayed would be one."
"Friend, our marriage and single ever after is coming. So whatever your situation in life, stand firm alongside your brothers and sisters in Christ. Let nothing move you or divide your devotion. Give yourself fully to the Lord and his concerns. And know that whether you have a spouse or do not have a spouse or no longer have a spouse, your labor in the Lord is not in vain."
February 26, 2026
4.5 - While this will not become my go to book on singleness, it shines in highlighting that marriage is 1) not the goal of the believer’s life and 2) not an eternal reality.
March 1, 2026
While without a doubt this book is an amazing resource for singles, married folks should not be quick to dismiss it… this IS a marriage book, in my opinion! Highly recommend!
September 30, 2025
I was skeptical about this book, but I have to admit, it was absolutely fantastic and theologically dense. I especially appreciated the author's view that singleness is not only instrumentally valuable (what you can do in singleness - how most people view it), but is also intrinsically valuable (valuable in itself as pointing to eternity). So helpful for me and I'm sure for others as well who can feel bogged down in a works-dependent view of singleness. Highly recommend.
March 16, 2026
Full review here: https://dearstrangethings.substack.co...
March 31, 2026
Incredibly thoughtful and wise. Dani helped to put into perspective advice and principles I’ve heard in the past very clearly and theologically. “The only remedy for our sinful hearts is the redeeming gospel of Jesus Christ” 🔥
June 7, 2026
There are a lot of good points in this book, including and especially the fundamental point, and there is a lot I liked about it. There are also several things I found frustrating with it.
The fundamental point, I take it, is that singleness is intrinsically good, just as marriage is intrinsically good, because they both envision and point us to aspects of the life to come in the hereafter. She highlights the eschatological meaning of singleness since everyone will be “Single Ever After”, as there is no marriage in heaven. Further, she argues that singles, both intentional and those by circumstance, are equally capable of living fulfilled, faithful, and sanctified lives dedicated to Christ as married people. Good stuff. She is also clearly frustrated, understandably so, with many of the negative messages received or absorbed about singleness (and marriage) in evangelical culture and churches, and that frustration is quite apparent.
Here are some things I liked that are good takeaways:
1. The fundamental point that singleness has intrinsic good in virtue of imaging eternity, the “single ever after” where people will “neither marry nor be given in marriage” (Matthew 22:30).
2. Sexuality (sexual nature) is not fundamentally about sexual desires or actions, as revealed by the “single ever after”. This was a really interesting and important point.
3. Everyone must exercise self-control with respect to their sexual desires
4. Encourages relationships between married couples and their single friends and gave practical advice on how to facilitate strengthening that friendship.
5. Pointing out that the “not good for man to be alone” is not referring to an unmarried state, but that “Adam was quite simply the only human person in creation” (p. 37). God making another human, Eve, not only made possible a friendship or marital relationship with Adam, but also every single other human relationship (friendship, familial, and otherwise) of himself and every future human. The fundamental solution to Adam’s aloneness was not marriage, but simply another human being.
6. She says that your gift is not based primarily or exclusively in how you feel about the gift of singleness. Obviously, if marriage is difficult at times, that doesn’t mean you don’t have the gift of marriage. Singleness should be considered similarly.
7. She gives helpful clarifications and important points about the meaning of burning with passion and exercising self-control based on the Greek text.
Here are some things I was frustrated by:
1. She reduces the “gift of singleness” to the state of singleness.
She says simply, “if you are single, then you have the gift.” Considering the same word for “gift” in the New Testament, charism or charisma, is used in the other spiritual gifts, some explanation is owed on how singleness relates to the other spiritual gifts in 1 Corinthians 12 or the other NT references. It would be really weird for singleness to be radically different from spiritual gifts in virtually every respect. If Treweek is right, then every Christian has the gift of faith, since every Christian has faith. But obviously that trivializes spiritual gifts, so that can’t be what it means.
She defends this asymmetry between singleness and other spiritual gifts via reductio. 1. If the gift of singleness is a supernatural empowerment to be content and faithful in the state of singleness, then many single people would be unable to be content and faithful in their singleness. 2. But single people are capable of living a content, fulfilled, and faithful life. 3. Therefore, the gift of singleness must not be a supernatural empowerment. This sounds convincing until you make the same argument against spiritual gifts. Are those without spiritual gift of faith capable of having faith and living a content and faithful life? Yes, of course. Ditto for teaching, etc. The gift of X doesn’t imply living with X while being content and faithful is impossible w/o the gift; presumably, it means it would be easier in some respects. But as Paul says, “Each of you has your own gift from God; one has this gift, another has that.” I may be required to teach even when I don’t have the gift because of a need in the church. Sometimes our descriptive status, while morally appropriate, is not aligned with our gifting. That’s okay & not surprising.
This reductive view is especially horrifying when consistently applied to the corresponding gift of marriage, which she is willing to do so. She says that the gift of singleness “is simply the gift of being single for so long as you are single”, and the gift of marriage “is simply the gift of being married for so long as you are married.” This means that one way to receive the gift of singleness is by divorcing someone, which hardly seems plausible. A gift of a state should mean something more than a mere description of being in that state, such as being suited or disposed towards a certain task or attribute. And since the gift is singleness is parallel to the gift of marriage in 1 Cor 7, it seems more likely that this gift is referring to a lifelong state rather than any temporary instance of singleness as Treweek alleges; I think Max Thurian on this point is convincing. There’s a lot more to say here but this is a GoodReads review.
She claims that, historically, the early church fathers agreed with her interpretation of the gift, and she suffices to link a blog post series of hers where she defends this view. Her blog posts are underwhelming; a more accurate characterization, I think, would be that the early church fathers simply didn’t have much to say on what it exactly means to have the “gift” of singleness, though they definitely went out of their way to sing the praises of lifelong commitments to singleness and viewed Matthew 19 and 1 Corinthians 7 in this same light. I think this hardly supports her point that the gift of singleness just means the descriptive state of singleness of any variety.
2. She discourages commitments of vocational/lifelong singleness for inconsistent reasons.
She is against vows of such a lifelong commitment because of James 4:14-15 and Matthew 5:33 that it fails to appreciate God’s sovereignty and is against Jesus’ warning. Against the obvious reductio that marriage would be doing the same thing, she says that faithfulness in marriage requires such a commitment. Obviously, faithfulness in marriage requires such a commitment because you make an oath, not the other way around. She might say that making an oath is inherent in marriage, but not in singleness, but obviously making an oath would also be inherent to vocational lifelong singleness, so she has no grounds to discourage making such an oath in that case. This is especially true if, as Catholic priests see it, vocational singleness involves an oath of marriage to Christ, and Treweek has no qualms about oaths in marriages. Treweek rightfully points out that the Reformers went “too far” in their corrective to the Catholic church’s enforcement of celibacy, but then she goes too far in discouraging anyone from even a voluntary commitment of this. Her criticisms of some defenses of lifelong singleness were lackluster and bordering on being misleading and playing word games.
3. She downplayed the differences between intentional and circumstantial singleness in ways I thought were trying to avoid the obvious.
I appreciate that Treweek warns against praising intentional singleness as the only valuable kind of singleness (chapter 4). It’s true that intentional singleness is not the only valuable kind of singleness, as both retain the intrinsic, eschatological meaning and significance. But it’s also true that intentional singleness is obviously more valuable than unintentional singleness, both intrinsically and instrumentally (though this is person dependent). Intrinsically, because intentional, lifelong singleness admits of both the singleness intrinsic value and the value of a faithful lifelong commitment to marriage with Christ, something that being circumstantially single does not do. Further, dating and pursuing a spouse obviously takes a lot. If you have given a vow of singleness, you are freer to pursue matters of the Kingdom more fully and directly, though this potential benefit will only bear out for some people. I’ll return to this.
While I appreciate her wanting people to value singleness by itself no matter the circumstances, and I agree with her, attempting to level two things that are obviously importantly different is really unnecessary.
4. Her exegesis of Matthew 19 is inconsistent
Her exegesis of Jesus’ comments about eunuchs is very interesting. The context is that the Pharisees asked Jesus when divorce is permitted, Jesus said only for sexual immorality. Jesus later references the eunuchs in his reply: “For there are eunuchs who were born that way, and there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by others, and there are those who choose to live like eunuchs for the sake of the Kingdom of Heaven. The one who can accept this should accept it.” Treweek’s proposal is that since the context is an answer to the question of divorce, the “eunuchs who choose to live like eunuchs” are only referring to those who, upon divorce, chose to remain single for the duration of their lives.
Let us say that she is correct on how to interpret this third group of eunuchs. Looking into it more carefully did make me more open to the idea that the voluntary eunuch was primarily a reference to a divorcee who chooses to not remarry. But Treweek also thinks that the first two groups of eunuchs, those who were born eunuchs or were made eunuchs by men, may be referring to those who are never married but single by circumstance. So, she would count herself as a eunuch because she desires to be married but circumstances have never worked in that direction. There is simply no way to insist that eunuchs who choose to live like eunuchs are only those who have divorced and not those choose to be voluntarily single for life, while eunuchs who were born eunuchs or were made eunuchs by man may be those who were never divorced but just happen to be single. Given that the argument for the divorcee interpretation of the eunuch is simply the context of divorce, then surely either all 3 categories of eunuchs are only divorcees, or all 3 categories are either never-married people or divorcees, but not that the third category has to be divorcees but the first two can be never-married people. This is an inconsistent way to interpret the 3 categories of eunuchs in Matthew 19.
5. She complicates and confuses something that is really simple, which is the undivided interests of the single person
She discusses the issue of distraction and devotion in marriage vs singleness in a way that makes something complicated and confusing when it is really straightforward. Paul says that one reason to be single is to have undivided interests, while married people have divided interests, being concerned about worldly affairs and how to please their spouse. It becomes clear when understanding this claim to be relative and person-dependent.
On the one hand, I understand being frustrated with an expectation that a single person would always be available for any type of church ministry since they aren’t married with kids, and this type of purported availability “being ‘weaponized’ against them in a particular ministry context.” I agree with that for sure, though thankfully that’s never happened to me. Similarly, I fully agree that “whether we are married or single”, the right response to Christ is “nothing less than our full and undivided devotion to him” (p. 105).
On the other hand, I think her discussion obscures two points that I think are obvious and frequently are missing from discussion of this passage, which offer significant clarification: 1) relatively divided vs undivided interests, and 2) person-dependence of the division of one’s interests.
A married person’s interests are relatively divided compared to a single person. The kinds of things a married comparison is concerned with is a strictly larger set than the kinds of things a single person is concerned with. Things that are contained in a married person include a spouse (and, frequently, children) that are just not contained in a single person’s set of interests. This doesn’t mean the single person has fewer total interests, or fewer people to care about, or less important interests, or feels less strongly about their interests, etc. A spouse (and a child) is simply a categorically different kind of concern than that of friendships, job, ministry, etc.
Secondly, the importance of the relative division of interests differs between married and single people in person-dependent ways. It’s incredible to me how people seem to only interpret Paul’s comments in categorical, rather than person-dependent, ways. This theme is even more surprising when it’s clear Paul was thinking in person-dependent patterns rather than categorical ones. For example, 1 Cor 7:36-38 demands that each person evaluate himself to see which of these apply to himself.
In agreement with Treweek, the married and the single person need to have undivided devotion to God. However, for the married person who should be married, undivided devotion looks like (relatively) divided interests. But it is not for every person to avoid this additional division of interests for the sake of the Kingdom. For the person who should be married, they should take on this extra division of interests, and a spouse may help focus their attention on things that would be more God-glorifying than if they were single. Thus, for some people, intentional singleness would be worse overall than marriage, for vice versa for others. There is a statistical person-dependence here.
I appreciate her takeaways from this discussion, which is that single people can and should live as models of undivided devotion, and married people should live look to single people for a model of undivided devotion. And the reason why this model makes sense is exactly because singleness tends to allow for relatively undivided interests, and not the other way around, because single people tend to be able to focus more on their direct ministry work compared to married people.
Conclusion
There are many good things in this book. I do think it offers a helpful corrective to the downplaying of singleness, its value, and its significance as more than simply a temporary placeholder for “not-yet-married”. I think her point would be strengthened if she did not downplay and discourage intentional, lifelong singleness as a legitimate act of obedience and one that, per Paul, does enable (person-dependently and relatively) greater Kingdom focus. I appreciate her points and contributions, many of which are valuable, though I found a few of them unsupported or inconsistent. I will definitely be reading her academic book The Meaning of Singleness that I hope explores some of these issues more in depth. I recommend this book to someone who finds their singleness (esp. by circumstance) frustrating & devalued in (e.g. evangelical) church culture, with my qualms clarified above.
The fundamental point, I take it, is that singleness is intrinsically good, just as marriage is intrinsically good, because they both envision and point us to aspects of the life to come in the hereafter. She highlights the eschatological meaning of singleness since everyone will be “Single Ever After”, as there is no marriage in heaven. Further, she argues that singles, both intentional and those by circumstance, are equally capable of living fulfilled, faithful, and sanctified lives dedicated to Christ as married people. Good stuff. She is also clearly frustrated, understandably so, with many of the negative messages received or absorbed about singleness (and marriage) in evangelical culture and churches, and that frustration is quite apparent.
Here are some things I liked that are good takeaways:
1. The fundamental point that singleness has intrinsic good in virtue of imaging eternity, the “single ever after” where people will “neither marry nor be given in marriage” (Matthew 22:30).
2. Sexuality (sexual nature) is not fundamentally about sexual desires or actions, as revealed by the “single ever after”. This was a really interesting and important point.
3. Everyone must exercise self-control with respect to their sexual desires
4. Encourages relationships between married couples and their single friends and gave practical advice on how to facilitate strengthening that friendship.
5. Pointing out that the “not good for man to be alone” is not referring to an unmarried state, but that “Adam was quite simply the only human person in creation” (p. 37). God making another human, Eve, not only made possible a friendship or marital relationship with Adam, but also every single other human relationship (friendship, familial, and otherwise) of himself and every future human. The fundamental solution to Adam’s aloneness was not marriage, but simply another human being.
6. She says that your gift is not based primarily or exclusively in how you feel about the gift of singleness. Obviously, if marriage is difficult at times, that doesn’t mean you don’t have the gift of marriage. Singleness should be considered similarly.
7. She gives helpful clarifications and important points about the meaning of burning with passion and exercising self-control based on the Greek text.
Here are some things I was frustrated by:
1. She reduces the “gift of singleness” to the state of singleness.
She says simply, “if you are single, then you have the gift.” Considering the same word for “gift” in the New Testament, charism or charisma, is used in the other spiritual gifts, some explanation is owed on how singleness relates to the other spiritual gifts in 1 Corinthians 12 or the other NT references. It would be really weird for singleness to be radically different from spiritual gifts in virtually every respect. If Treweek is right, then every Christian has the gift of faith, since every Christian has faith. But obviously that trivializes spiritual gifts, so that can’t be what it means.
She defends this asymmetry between singleness and other spiritual gifts via reductio. 1. If the gift of singleness is a supernatural empowerment to be content and faithful in the state of singleness, then many single people would be unable to be content and faithful in their singleness. 2. But single people are capable of living a content, fulfilled, and faithful life. 3. Therefore, the gift of singleness must not be a supernatural empowerment. This sounds convincing until you make the same argument against spiritual gifts. Are those without spiritual gift of faith capable of having faith and living a content and faithful life? Yes, of course. Ditto for teaching, etc. The gift of X doesn’t imply living with X while being content and faithful is impossible w/o the gift; presumably, it means it would be easier in some respects. But as Paul says, “Each of you has your own gift from God; one has this gift, another has that.” I may be required to teach even when I don’t have the gift because of a need in the church. Sometimes our descriptive status, while morally appropriate, is not aligned with our gifting. That’s okay & not surprising.
This reductive view is especially horrifying when consistently applied to the corresponding gift of marriage, which she is willing to do so. She says that the gift of singleness “is simply the gift of being single for so long as you are single”, and the gift of marriage “is simply the gift of being married for so long as you are married.” This means that one way to receive the gift of singleness is by divorcing someone, which hardly seems plausible. A gift of a state should mean something more than a mere description of being in that state, such as being suited or disposed towards a certain task or attribute. And since the gift is singleness is parallel to the gift of marriage in 1 Cor 7, it seems more likely that this gift is referring to a lifelong state rather than any temporary instance of singleness as Treweek alleges; I think Max Thurian on this point is convincing. There’s a lot more to say here but this is a GoodReads review.
She claims that, historically, the early church fathers agreed with her interpretation of the gift, and she suffices to link a blog post series of hers where she defends this view. Her blog posts are underwhelming; a more accurate characterization, I think, would be that the early church fathers simply didn’t have much to say on what it exactly means to have the “gift” of singleness, though they definitely went out of their way to sing the praises of lifelong commitments to singleness and viewed Matthew 19 and 1 Corinthians 7 in this same light. I think this hardly supports her point that the gift of singleness just means the descriptive state of singleness of any variety.
2. She discourages commitments of vocational/lifelong singleness for inconsistent reasons.
She is against vows of such a lifelong commitment because of James 4:14-15 and Matthew 5:33 that it fails to appreciate God’s sovereignty and is against Jesus’ warning. Against the obvious reductio that marriage would be doing the same thing, she says that faithfulness in marriage requires such a commitment. Obviously, faithfulness in marriage requires such a commitment because you make an oath, not the other way around. She might say that making an oath is inherent in marriage, but not in singleness, but obviously making an oath would also be inherent to vocational lifelong singleness, so she has no grounds to discourage making such an oath in that case. This is especially true if, as Catholic priests see it, vocational singleness involves an oath of marriage to Christ, and Treweek has no qualms about oaths in marriages. Treweek rightfully points out that the Reformers went “too far” in their corrective to the Catholic church’s enforcement of celibacy, but then she goes too far in discouraging anyone from even a voluntary commitment of this. Her criticisms of some defenses of lifelong singleness were lackluster and bordering on being misleading and playing word games.
3. She downplayed the differences between intentional and circumstantial singleness in ways I thought were trying to avoid the obvious.
I appreciate that Treweek warns against praising intentional singleness as the only valuable kind of singleness (chapter 4). It’s true that intentional singleness is not the only valuable kind of singleness, as both retain the intrinsic, eschatological meaning and significance. But it’s also true that intentional singleness is obviously more valuable than unintentional singleness, both intrinsically and instrumentally (though this is person dependent). Intrinsically, because intentional, lifelong singleness admits of both the singleness intrinsic value and the value of a faithful lifelong commitment to marriage with Christ, something that being circumstantially single does not do. Further, dating and pursuing a spouse obviously takes a lot. If you have given a vow of singleness, you are freer to pursue matters of the Kingdom more fully and directly, though this potential benefit will only bear out for some people. I’ll return to this.
While I appreciate her wanting people to value singleness by itself no matter the circumstances, and I agree with her, attempting to level two things that are obviously importantly different is really unnecessary.
4. Her exegesis of Matthew 19 is inconsistent
Her exegesis of Jesus’ comments about eunuchs is very interesting. The context is that the Pharisees asked Jesus when divorce is permitted, Jesus said only for sexual immorality. Jesus later references the eunuchs in his reply: “For there are eunuchs who were born that way, and there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by others, and there are those who choose to live like eunuchs for the sake of the Kingdom of Heaven. The one who can accept this should accept it.” Treweek’s proposal is that since the context is an answer to the question of divorce, the “eunuchs who choose to live like eunuchs” are only referring to those who, upon divorce, chose to remain single for the duration of their lives.
Let us say that she is correct on how to interpret this third group of eunuchs. Looking into it more carefully did make me more open to the idea that the voluntary eunuch was primarily a reference to a divorcee who chooses to not remarry. But Treweek also thinks that the first two groups of eunuchs, those who were born eunuchs or were made eunuchs by men, may be referring to those who are never married but single by circumstance. So, she would count herself as a eunuch because she desires to be married but circumstances have never worked in that direction. There is simply no way to insist that eunuchs who choose to live like eunuchs are only those who have divorced and not those choose to be voluntarily single for life, while eunuchs who were born eunuchs or were made eunuchs by man may be those who were never divorced but just happen to be single. Given that the argument for the divorcee interpretation of the eunuch is simply the context of divorce, then surely either all 3 categories of eunuchs are only divorcees, or all 3 categories are either never-married people or divorcees, but not that the third category has to be divorcees but the first two can be never-married people. This is an inconsistent way to interpret the 3 categories of eunuchs in Matthew 19.
5. She complicates and confuses something that is really simple, which is the undivided interests of the single person
She discusses the issue of distraction and devotion in marriage vs singleness in a way that makes something complicated and confusing when it is really straightforward. Paul says that one reason to be single is to have undivided interests, while married people have divided interests, being concerned about worldly affairs and how to please their spouse. It becomes clear when understanding this claim to be relative and person-dependent.
On the one hand, I understand being frustrated with an expectation that a single person would always be available for any type of church ministry since they aren’t married with kids, and this type of purported availability “being ‘weaponized’ against them in a particular ministry context.” I agree with that for sure, though thankfully that’s never happened to me. Similarly, I fully agree that “whether we are married or single”, the right response to Christ is “nothing less than our full and undivided devotion to him” (p. 105).
On the other hand, I think her discussion obscures two points that I think are obvious and frequently are missing from discussion of this passage, which offer significant clarification: 1) relatively divided vs undivided interests, and 2) person-dependence of the division of one’s interests.
A married person’s interests are relatively divided compared to a single person. The kinds of things a married comparison is concerned with is a strictly larger set than the kinds of things a single person is concerned with. Things that are contained in a married person include a spouse (and, frequently, children) that are just not contained in a single person’s set of interests. This doesn’t mean the single person has fewer total interests, or fewer people to care about, or less important interests, or feels less strongly about their interests, etc. A spouse (and a child) is simply a categorically different kind of concern than that of friendships, job, ministry, etc.
Secondly, the importance of the relative division of interests differs between married and single people in person-dependent ways. It’s incredible to me how people seem to only interpret Paul’s comments in categorical, rather than person-dependent, ways. This theme is even more surprising when it’s clear Paul was thinking in person-dependent patterns rather than categorical ones. For example, 1 Cor 7:36-38 demands that each person evaluate himself to see which of these apply to himself.
In agreement with Treweek, the married and the single person need to have undivided devotion to God. However, for the married person who should be married, undivided devotion looks like (relatively) divided interests. But it is not for every person to avoid this additional division of interests for the sake of the Kingdom. For the person who should be married, they should take on this extra division of interests, and a spouse may help focus their attention on things that would be more God-glorifying than if they were single. Thus, for some people, intentional singleness would be worse overall than marriage, for vice versa for others. There is a statistical person-dependence here.
I appreciate her takeaways from this discussion, which is that single people can and should live as models of undivided devotion, and married people should live look to single people for a model of undivided devotion. And the reason why this model makes sense is exactly because singleness tends to allow for relatively undivided interests, and not the other way around, because single people tend to be able to focus more on their direct ministry work compared to married people.
Conclusion
There are many good things in this book. I do think it offers a helpful corrective to the downplaying of singleness, its value, and its significance as more than simply a temporary placeholder for “not-yet-married”. I think her point would be strengthened if she did not downplay and discourage intentional, lifelong singleness as a legitimate act of obedience and one that, per Paul, does enable (person-dependently and relatively) greater Kingdom focus. I appreciate her points and contributions, many of which are valuable, though I found a few of them unsupported or inconsistent. I will definitely be reading her academic book The Meaning of Singleness that I hope explores some of these issues more in depth. I recommend this book to someone who finds their singleness (esp. by circumstance) frustrating & devalued in (e.g. evangelical) church culture, with my qualms clarified above.
March 19, 2026
This is honestly the best book on singleness I’ve read so far. 🤩
The author explores angles I wasn’t expecting, such as the purpose of our femaleness and maleness beyond sex. The primary relationship we'll share in eternity as resurrected, gendered humans will be as siblings, and the church is meant to be a space where that beautiful future is reflected among the married, the never-married, the divorced, and the widows. Let's cool down our obsession with marriage, please! 😅 Her theology of sexuality also reminds us that sex was made for marriage (not marriage for sex), and clarifies why sexual sin is so damaging.
Treweek's tone is humble, clear, and thoughtful, drawing from Scripture, personal experience, and the testimonies of others. And amidst all the theology, she manages to remain very practical, giving helpful guidance for both singles and married people.
This is truly a keeper I'll be recommending. 💎
The author explores angles I wasn’t expecting, such as the purpose of our femaleness and maleness beyond sex. The primary relationship we'll share in eternity as resurrected, gendered humans will be as siblings, and the church is meant to be a space where that beautiful future is reflected among the married, the never-married, the divorced, and the widows. Let's cool down our obsession with marriage, please! 😅 Her theology of sexuality also reminds us that sex was made for marriage (not marriage for sex), and clarifies why sexual sin is so damaging.
Treweek's tone is humble, clear, and thoughtful, drawing from Scripture, personal experience, and the testimonies of others. And amidst all the theology, she manages to remain very practical, giving helpful guidance for both singles and married people.
This is truly a keeper I'll be recommending. 💎
January 2, 2026
An excellent book on how to view singleness, marriage, and sex in light of spiritual realities and eternity. I wish every Christian could read this book and know how to better engage with themselves and their single and married friends.
February 12, 2026
Is it dramatic to say that this book was life changing? Because that’s how I feel. Treweek speaks of singleness, not only as dignified, but as valuable and needed in the church because of how it reflects our relationship to each other in the hereafter (when marriage will no longer exist). She helps give purpose and perspective to what can often be seen as a “less than” position in life without putting down the importance of marriage and what it signifies. I appreciated her lack of bitterness and her honoring of all phases of life.
The sections on sexuality were poignant, thought-provoking, and full of grace without pulling any punches. She talked about gender and sexuality and what that might be like as new creations in ways I’ve never thought of and were slightly mind-bending, but also encouraging.
I would implore all my Christian friends, no matter your marital status, to read this book. It is for everyone.
The sections on sexuality were poignant, thought-provoking, and full of grace without pulling any punches. She talked about gender and sexuality and what that might be like as new creations in ways I’ve never thought of and were slightly mind-bending, but also encouraging.
I would implore all my Christian friends, no matter your marital status, to read this book. It is for everyone.
Read
January 6, 2026A really thoughtful and helpful exploration of the Bible's stance on singleness for the now and for the ever after.
I appreciated how Dani balanced exploring key passages on singleness and marriage with her very practical advice to both the married and the single (the structure of each chapter being broken into two parts really helped with that I think).
I also appreciated how relevant some of her comments were on certain issues, such as what it means to be burning with passion and how to navigate contentment in singleness while longing for marriage. All of those topics have helped me personally in my thinking.
I did, however, find some of her views on intentional singleness to be unique. I haven't fully thought it through, but I'm not sure I agree with her views...but disagreements are good 🤷
I appreciated how Dani balanced exploring key passages on singleness and marriage with her very practical advice to both the married and the single (the structure of each chapter being broken into two parts really helped with that I think).
I also appreciated how relevant some of her comments were on certain issues, such as what it means to be burning with passion and how to navigate contentment in singleness while longing for marriage. All of those topics have helped me personally in my thinking.
I did, however, find some of her views on intentional singleness to be unique. I haven't fully thought it through, but I'm not sure I agree with her views...but disagreements are good 🤷
January 20, 2026
This book was great and I would recommend to Christians single and married! The author does some solid exegetical work to properly understand passages that are thrown around in singleness discussions so that unbiblical assumptions around singleness were undone appropriately. As a married person I also found it helpful in many ways, because many of the discussions also inevitably included conclusions about marriage too. It’s a pastorally sensitive book without being wishy washy - instead, it leans in to the beauty of the Bible’s vision of the church and eternity for true comfort and wisdom!
December 19, 2025
Genuinely a great book which I hope many people will read (whether single or married). It explores the reality that everyone will be single in the new creation and how we should be living in light of the resurrection even now. It breaks down different passages on singleness before having a chapter on application for each. It also helpfully challenges many preconceived ideas I've heard and even wrestled with myself, and helps me understand many passages in a new light in a way I could explain to others now. 5/5 book, hope to read it again.
January 24, 2026
A helpful read on singleness and marriage within the church. I appreciated how the joys and challenges of singleness are addressed and I've learnt about the importance of pursuing faithfulness to Christ regardless of my circumstance. I really enjoyed reading this one!
September 22, 2025
Really, really, REALLY good. Will be putting into the hands of those in my young adult ministry wrestling with these things.
January 24, 2026
7 stars! Married and single should read this book. Church pastors, please read this book. Everyone, please read this book.
February 1, 2026
A really helpful read - would encourage single and married Christian’s alike to read this 😊
April 28, 2026
4 or 5 ⭐️
I can’t decide how to rate this, but I found it really helpful, well written and I’d recommend it to anyone.
I can’t decide how to rate this, but I found it really helpful, well written and I’d recommend it to anyone.
February 22, 2026
Audiobook. Highly recommend listening because it’s read by the author, whose accent and voice are very pleasant. The content of the book is excellent. It not only provided a very mature, biblical perspective different from my own, but gave practical advice on how to better love and serve those around me who are single. Definitely worth reading whether married or single!
March 26, 2026
Every Christian (single, dating, engaged, married) needs to run to read this book!!! Especially those in Christian leadership positions in ministry or churches
November 5, 2025
I'm so grateful to Dani for writing this book. After reading her first book, I was a little worried it might be a bit too technical for some - but I was worrying for nothing. This is one of the simplest and yet most profound books I've ever read. I will be recommending this to others for many years.
Speaking as a married man, this was actually one of the best books on marriage I have read. I didn't expect that, but truly, it is. It really is a great book for ALL Christians - married, single, or 'it's complicated'.
I especially appreciated how each chapter was divided up into topics (part 1) and practical application (part 2).
Highly recommended.
Speaking as a married man, this was actually one of the best books on marriage I have read. I didn't expect that, but truly, it is. It really is a great book for ALL Christians - married, single, or 'it's complicated'.
I especially appreciated how each chapter was divided up into topics (part 1) and practical application (part 2).
Highly recommended.
May 26, 2026
genuinely so good no notes all Christians (married or single) should read
February 23, 2026
I normally shy away from any book about singleness in the fear I’m somehow condemning myself to a life of lonely spinsterhood, but this book did the opposite! A really refreshing read that is not just for single people. I’m so fortunate to be at a church where this book was plugged by a married person to encourage everyone to read it so that we might understand and support church family better. And whilst the book is mainly giving advice for singleness, it also does speak to married people.
The author was honest about the different struggles of singleness depending on situations but also reminds you to enjoy the positives in being single. It unpacked a lot of misconceptions in how singleness has been framed to me in the past. For example, I’ve often been taught that singleness is great as it gives you more time to serve others - which can create a bit of resentment or pressure at using your time wisely. But Trewsek was helpful at showing this is not the only benefit but also the ‘having more time’ comment not necessarily being the case exclusively for singles- as we all have different situations and capacities. And everyone regardless of relationship status should be using their time wisely to honour God! The wider perspective she gave in the earlier chapters was re-framing the purpose for singleness in what it shows us about Jesus, and then equally how marriage points us towards another aspect of him.
The chapters gave advice on a range of topics such as feeling isolated, sexual temptation and what the bible means by the ‘gift’ of singleness. I found the chapter distinguishing between the misconceptions on this term of ‘gift’ super helpful. Being someone myself who is single out of circumstance and not choice (like most single women I know), it was reassuring to hear that you don’t have a special supernatural gift to be single nor do you need one - in the sense that all Christians have the power of the Spirit at work in us to help us in the circumstances and situations we face.
There is more I could say on the book and I’m still processing my thoughts… but overall an empowering read that has supported me in my walk with the Lord and pointed me back to that eternal perspective we need to see our lives and relationship statuses through - that ultimately we will live happily ever after with Christ in glory.
The author was honest about the different struggles of singleness depending on situations but also reminds you to enjoy the positives in being single. It unpacked a lot of misconceptions in how singleness has been framed to me in the past. For example, I’ve often been taught that singleness is great as it gives you more time to serve others - which can create a bit of resentment or pressure at using your time wisely. But Trewsek was helpful at showing this is not the only benefit but also the ‘having more time’ comment not necessarily being the case exclusively for singles- as we all have different situations and capacities. And everyone regardless of relationship status should be using their time wisely to honour God! The wider perspective she gave in the earlier chapters was re-framing the purpose for singleness in what it shows us about Jesus, and then equally how marriage points us towards another aspect of him.
The chapters gave advice on a range of topics such as feeling isolated, sexual temptation and what the bible means by the ‘gift’ of singleness. I found the chapter distinguishing between the misconceptions on this term of ‘gift’ super helpful. Being someone myself who is single out of circumstance and not choice (like most single women I know), it was reassuring to hear that you don’t have a special supernatural gift to be single nor do you need one - in the sense that all Christians have the power of the Spirit at work in us to help us in the circumstances and situations we face.
There is more I could say on the book and I’m still processing my thoughts… but overall an empowering read that has supported me in my walk with the Lord and pointed me back to that eternal perspective we need to see our lives and relationship statuses through - that ultimately we will live happily ever after with Christ in glory.
March 13, 2026
Idolising marriage and sex can and does creep into otherwise good evangelical churches. This book is a very helpful corrective. I am grateful that Dani not only gave theological reasoning grounded in a careful exegesis of the Bible, but also gave plentiful practical and pastoral suggestions to "live out" the truth about singleness. Some of what Dani said was very challenging to me personally and even stung a little, but in a good way, I believe. I do have questions about some points Dani was making, but perhaps I will need to read her fuller theological treatment on singleness (The Meaning of Singleness) to understand and assess her arguments better.
I listened to the audiobook, but I'm getting a physical copy as well, because I think it's worth having a closer look and also to lend to others.
I listened to the audiobook, but I'm getting a physical copy as well, because I think it's worth having a closer look and also to lend to others.
November 24, 2025
Well, thanks Dani for writing a book that reflects much of the one I had been (sheepishly) wondering about writing. With that, probably won’t surprise anyone reading this how highly I recommend this book. Love how she not only has an engaging writing style addressing relevant topics but also has a depth of theological teaching. Speaking of the theological teaching, I will need to think further on her analysis of 1 corin 7 and its relation to marriage, plus, related, her writings on sexuality as I’m not sure I agree, but she actually welcomes that in the book. Grateful for the relevant, thoughtful book.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 75 reviews