What do you think?
Rate this book
Momentum for Life: Biblical Practices for Sustaining Physical Health, Personal Integrity, and Strategic Focus
Visionary pastor Michael Slaughter calls all aspiring leaders to a life of faith, balance, and purpose. Operating on the principle that all leadership begins with self-leadership, the book outlines five crucial disciplines:
* Devotion to God
* Readiness for lifelong learning
* Investing in key relationships
* Visioning for the future
* Eating and Exercise for life.
Readers will gain insights and advice for enriching the spiritual, intellectual, interpersonal, missional, and physical areas of their lives, all of which are integral to effectiveness as a leader.
* Devotion to God
* Readiness for lifelong learning
* Investing in key relationships
* Visioning for the future
* Eating and Exercise for life.
Readers will gain insights and advice for enriching the spiritual, intellectual, interpersonal, missional, and physical areas of their lives, all of which are integral to effectiveness as a leader.
145 pages, Paperback
First published September 1, 2005
10 people are currently reading
41 people want to read
About the author
Mike Slaughter
75 books19 followersMike Slaughter is the lead pastor at Ginghamsburg Church in Tipp City, Ohio. Under his leadership, Ginghamsburg became known as an early innovator of small group ministry and a leader in global mission efforts. A frequently sought-after speaker, he is the author of many books, including Dare to Dream, Hijacked, Change the World, Christmas Is Not Your Birthday, and Upside Living in a Downside Economy.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 9 of 9 reviews
April 13, 2016
Michael Slaughter asserted that individuals cannot achieve their goals in life without maintaining “momentum” and that all leaders must attend to “self-leadership” before they can effectively influence others. He cited a lack of commitment and discipline in particular as factors that can derail this momentum and further included a series of proscriptions (which he represents by the acronym D.R.I.V.E. - i.e. Devotion, Readiness, Investing, Vision, and Eating and Exercise) whereby he believed that individuals can retain their focus and discipline to keep moving forward in their lives and endeavors. Though I agree with much of what he suggested – the importance of remaining connected to God through regular devotionals, protecting margin so that you have time to sufficiently invest in your relationships, investing all of your time wisely to most efficiently continue moving forward, having a comprehensive vision for the future, and maintaining the level of health necessary to continue striving toward your goal – I do have a few issues with minor inconsistencies and some oversimplifications of some very complex ideas.
The first of these apparent inconsistencies begins with a warning against allowing material things to become idols which then take the place of God in one’s life. In principle, I agree that this is important, but I would have better appreciated his view if he had done a more thorough job of delineating at exactly what point a need or a want transforms into an idol. In an attempt to address this he did relate an anecdote about his plans to purchase a Harley Davidson motor cycle. I suppose the impression that one is supposed to be left with is that yes, the desire for a Harley was an example of an idol in his life, but he does not really make that clear, at times seeming to defend the decision to make the purchase. He further never says whether or not he ended up buying it. It is clear that material things do a poor job of substituting for God, but taking the idea to its most extreme, one could argue then that the true Christian is only one who adopts the ascetic lifestyle of the monastic orders. I do not believe that is what the author was suggesting, but I would have appreciated a section explaining just exactly when the possession of things becomes problematic.
Another point that I feel begs for more clarification is in his opinions regarding work. He simultaneously seems to argue that work should be fulfilling, purposeful, and is vitally important (Man is charged to do all of his work for six days a week in the Bible, after all, he noted) as the supreme form of worship whereby one best serves God, but fails to take into consideration those who must do menial jobs that are anything but fulfilling simply to achieve subsistence. I suppose Slaughter would argue that whatever work you do should honor God and I do not disagree, but I think he makes a mistake by not explicitly denoting the difference between work and employment.
Employment, a series of assigned tasks for which one receives monetary compensation, is necessary for most people just to get by. It is the means by which the necessities of this life (food, water, shelter, etc.) might be obtained. Work on the other hand (at least for a Christian) is the sum of those endeavors in which one engages because it is pleasing to God. It is fortuitous if your work and your employment are the same thing. (I would argue that if you are a pastor like Mr. Slaughter and they are not the same there is probably a serious issue). However, this is not always the case for many if not most people.
Someone has to scrub floors and clean toilets. If one is a hotel maid, the labor involved is largely solitary, physically grueling, repetitive, and often extremely unpleasant. Though a hotel maid might exhibit a Christ-like attitude as she or he completes assigned tasks, this is not necessarily her or his “work” as Slaughter defines the term. The fact that this employment is not specifically "moving the Kingdom forward" does not mean that the maid is in any way a lesser Christian because of it than the professional pastor. Not everyone is blessed with employment that directly executes the purpose of God as a necessary condition of the job, but I do not think that the mere fact of engaging in these types of activities in any way impels a loss of momentum in one’s life. Though the employment may be that of maid perhaps the work is teaching a Sunday school class every weekend, cooking in a homeless shelter, ministering to the community as God presents opportunities whenever and wherever they happen to occur. I agree with Slaughter that purposeful work is important, but it is not necessarily the same as employment and I think the distinction is vitally important.
The third inconsistency that I note is regarding charitable giving. Early in the book Slaughter takes great pains to explain that monetary giving is not doing the will of God. Rather doing is doing the will of God and sacrifice is necessary. Now I understand what I think he means – praying and writing checks is not enough in and of itself to meet the needs of those to whom God has commanded the faithful to provide relief (the poor, the needy, the hungry, the homeless, etc.) However, he then goes into some detail over his own church’s highly successful efforts at collecting and sending money to Sudan. Perhaps he would argue that it was the fundraising itself that was the doing, but I think it important to note that the reason it was so successful was a whole lot of people sitting down to prayerfully write checks. Though, as Slaughter pointed out, the snares and downfalls of filthy lucre as well as the false idols it invariably constructs should be abhorred and avoided, the necessity of money to purchase the goods and services whereby we execute the will of God is an unavoidable reality. Yes, faith is made manifest through good works, but especially because it is such a vital component of virtually all Earthly endeavors, the importance of charitable giving should not be diminished.
Finally, the point with which I differ most sharply from Slaughter is his summation of the concept of “world view” (p. 34 – 37). Slaughter essentially divides all of humanity into four distinct worldviews (three of which, it is subtly insinuated, will send you straight to Hell). He lists them as secular, soft-secular, post-secular, and Christian. At the very least, this is a grossly oversimplified construct. He suggests that individuals file nicely into each of these boxes complete with a pre-approved slate of uniform values and beliefs – a stance that dramatically understates the nuance and variety inherent in the human condition. Further, I vociferously dispute his indirect insinuation that science and Christianity are necessarily mutually exclusive.
In the first place, and not even beginning to take into consideration the literally hundreds of religions that are not Christianity, I think very few real human beings actually fit so neatly into his four categories. Rather, I would argue, most people’s worldview exists on a continuum - individuals exhibiting multiple traits of multiple worldviews and value systems - and are subject to change over time. It is influenced by training and upbringing certainly but also through personal experiences as well as the lifelong learning Slaughter touted so prominently (and rightly so) later on in the text. I think most people take, rightly or wrongly, a more buffet-style approach to adopting a worldview even to the point of believing wildly inconsistent things simultaneously. Worldview is not a rote slate of values you adopt en masse identical to everyone else in the same narrow category. To assume that it is can only lead to wildly inaccurate innuendo rather than enlightenment.
Additionally, I found his three-sentence definition of “Christianity” severely lacking. I concur in the sense that all Christians should agree, “I am the way the truth and the light. No one comes to the Father but through me”. A commitment to serving Christ is what makes you a Christian. However, what I find problematic is his tone, which comes across as decidedly absolutist. This is not to say that there are no absolutes in the Christian faith. Certainly there are, but after “love thy God with all thy heart and all thy soul and all thy mind and liken unto this love thy neighbor as thyself” there are as many differing opinions about what service to Christ actually means in an everyday, concrete, real-life sense as there are separate denominations, sects, and churches. Christians of good faith who passionately love God disagree about a great many things and I believe it important to remember 1 Corinthians 12:12–15;
“For even as the body is one and yet has many members, and all the members of the body, though they are many, are one body, so also is Christ. For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free, and we were all made to drink of one Spirit the body is not one member, but many. If the foot says, 'Because I am not a hand, I am not a part of the body,' it is not for this reason any the less a part of the body.”
Being a Christian was a many and varied thing right from the beginning and the intervening two thousand years have only made it more so. Yes, we are all of one body, but we are not the same.
Lastly, I find his definition of a “secular” worldview as having been unnecessarily antagonistic toward science (which incidentally seems to contradict what he asserted later about lifelong learning). Perhaps he means an “atheist” rather than a “secular” view is problematic (and I would agree) but I personally am skeptical of the supernatural as a general rule and have a great deal of regard for human logic, though Slaughter specifically seemed to deride both of those. Having said that however, I do not believe it makes me any less of a Christian because I like to see empirical data about some claim or theory before I subscribe to it. Why should it surprise anyone that a purposeful, organized, thinking God who set down a great list of rules in His Word for humanity to follow in terms of how they should live their lives and relate to God and their fellow man would not also set down a similar set of rules for the rest of Creation as well? Human logic (which also should be noted was created in the image and likeness of The Almighty) is a God given tool whereby humanity might better understand the workings of the Creation and thereby also better understand the Creator himself. I think it notable that when Slaughter had his heart attack (described in the text) he did not immediately make phone calls to Billy Graham and James Dobson to rush to the hospital and commence a laying of hands. Rather he trusted the human logic of the human doctors to perform open heart surgery and remove the blockage. Now this is not to say the supernatural (i.e. miracles) cannot occur (why should it surprise anyone that He who made the rules can also bend them or break them?) but neither is a certain amount of skepticism about the supernatural nor a reliance on the God-given gift of human reason necessarily a representation of a lack of belief or faith.
In conclusion, though I think the text does in fact have a number of minor contradictions and I am no fan at all of his depiction of “worldview”, overall I think Slaughter’s proscriptions for a life full of momentum are mostly sound. A leader must discipline him or herself before being in a position to try and discipline anyone else. It is vitally important to have a plan, maintain focus without distraction on a clear vision for the future, and yet allocate time and effort appropriately so relationships are not adversely affected. It is difficult to argue with his assertion that the successful execution of any vision demands adequate personal health to see it through to fruition. Finally, for the faithful Christian, I agree that whatever the focus, in order to be fulfilled in all of one’s labors individuals must always meditate on the will of God and how best to execute the plan he has in store for the life of each person.
The first of these apparent inconsistencies begins with a warning against allowing material things to become idols which then take the place of God in one’s life. In principle, I agree that this is important, but I would have better appreciated his view if he had done a more thorough job of delineating at exactly what point a need or a want transforms into an idol. In an attempt to address this he did relate an anecdote about his plans to purchase a Harley Davidson motor cycle. I suppose the impression that one is supposed to be left with is that yes, the desire for a Harley was an example of an idol in his life, but he does not really make that clear, at times seeming to defend the decision to make the purchase. He further never says whether or not he ended up buying it. It is clear that material things do a poor job of substituting for God, but taking the idea to its most extreme, one could argue then that the true Christian is only one who adopts the ascetic lifestyle of the monastic orders. I do not believe that is what the author was suggesting, but I would have appreciated a section explaining just exactly when the possession of things becomes problematic.
Another point that I feel begs for more clarification is in his opinions regarding work. He simultaneously seems to argue that work should be fulfilling, purposeful, and is vitally important (Man is charged to do all of his work for six days a week in the Bible, after all, he noted) as the supreme form of worship whereby one best serves God, but fails to take into consideration those who must do menial jobs that are anything but fulfilling simply to achieve subsistence. I suppose Slaughter would argue that whatever work you do should honor God and I do not disagree, but I think he makes a mistake by not explicitly denoting the difference between work and employment.
Employment, a series of assigned tasks for which one receives monetary compensation, is necessary for most people just to get by. It is the means by which the necessities of this life (food, water, shelter, etc.) might be obtained. Work on the other hand (at least for a Christian) is the sum of those endeavors in which one engages because it is pleasing to God. It is fortuitous if your work and your employment are the same thing. (I would argue that if you are a pastor like Mr. Slaughter and they are not the same there is probably a serious issue). However, this is not always the case for many if not most people.
Someone has to scrub floors and clean toilets. If one is a hotel maid, the labor involved is largely solitary, physically grueling, repetitive, and often extremely unpleasant. Though a hotel maid might exhibit a Christ-like attitude as she or he completes assigned tasks, this is not necessarily her or his “work” as Slaughter defines the term. The fact that this employment is not specifically "moving the Kingdom forward" does not mean that the maid is in any way a lesser Christian because of it than the professional pastor. Not everyone is blessed with employment that directly executes the purpose of God as a necessary condition of the job, but I do not think that the mere fact of engaging in these types of activities in any way impels a loss of momentum in one’s life. Though the employment may be that of maid perhaps the work is teaching a Sunday school class every weekend, cooking in a homeless shelter, ministering to the community as God presents opportunities whenever and wherever they happen to occur. I agree with Slaughter that purposeful work is important, but it is not necessarily the same as employment and I think the distinction is vitally important.
The third inconsistency that I note is regarding charitable giving. Early in the book Slaughter takes great pains to explain that monetary giving is not doing the will of God. Rather doing is doing the will of God and sacrifice is necessary. Now I understand what I think he means – praying and writing checks is not enough in and of itself to meet the needs of those to whom God has commanded the faithful to provide relief (the poor, the needy, the hungry, the homeless, etc.) However, he then goes into some detail over his own church’s highly successful efforts at collecting and sending money to Sudan. Perhaps he would argue that it was the fundraising itself that was the doing, but I think it important to note that the reason it was so successful was a whole lot of people sitting down to prayerfully write checks. Though, as Slaughter pointed out, the snares and downfalls of filthy lucre as well as the false idols it invariably constructs should be abhorred and avoided, the necessity of money to purchase the goods and services whereby we execute the will of God is an unavoidable reality. Yes, faith is made manifest through good works, but especially because it is such a vital component of virtually all Earthly endeavors, the importance of charitable giving should not be diminished.
Finally, the point with which I differ most sharply from Slaughter is his summation of the concept of “world view” (p. 34 – 37). Slaughter essentially divides all of humanity into four distinct worldviews (three of which, it is subtly insinuated, will send you straight to Hell). He lists them as secular, soft-secular, post-secular, and Christian. At the very least, this is a grossly oversimplified construct. He suggests that individuals file nicely into each of these boxes complete with a pre-approved slate of uniform values and beliefs – a stance that dramatically understates the nuance and variety inherent in the human condition. Further, I vociferously dispute his indirect insinuation that science and Christianity are necessarily mutually exclusive.
In the first place, and not even beginning to take into consideration the literally hundreds of religions that are not Christianity, I think very few real human beings actually fit so neatly into his four categories. Rather, I would argue, most people’s worldview exists on a continuum - individuals exhibiting multiple traits of multiple worldviews and value systems - and are subject to change over time. It is influenced by training and upbringing certainly but also through personal experiences as well as the lifelong learning Slaughter touted so prominently (and rightly so) later on in the text. I think most people take, rightly or wrongly, a more buffet-style approach to adopting a worldview even to the point of believing wildly inconsistent things simultaneously. Worldview is not a rote slate of values you adopt en masse identical to everyone else in the same narrow category. To assume that it is can only lead to wildly inaccurate innuendo rather than enlightenment.
Additionally, I found his three-sentence definition of “Christianity” severely lacking. I concur in the sense that all Christians should agree, “I am the way the truth and the light. No one comes to the Father but through me”. A commitment to serving Christ is what makes you a Christian. However, what I find problematic is his tone, which comes across as decidedly absolutist. This is not to say that there are no absolutes in the Christian faith. Certainly there are, but after “love thy God with all thy heart and all thy soul and all thy mind and liken unto this love thy neighbor as thyself” there are as many differing opinions about what service to Christ actually means in an everyday, concrete, real-life sense as there are separate denominations, sects, and churches. Christians of good faith who passionately love God disagree about a great many things and I believe it important to remember 1 Corinthians 12:12–15;
“For even as the body is one and yet has many members, and all the members of the body, though they are many, are one body, so also is Christ. For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free, and we were all made to drink of one Spirit the body is not one member, but many. If the foot says, 'Because I am not a hand, I am not a part of the body,' it is not for this reason any the less a part of the body.”
Being a Christian was a many and varied thing right from the beginning and the intervening two thousand years have only made it more so. Yes, we are all of one body, but we are not the same.
Lastly, I find his definition of a “secular” worldview as having been unnecessarily antagonistic toward science (which incidentally seems to contradict what he asserted later about lifelong learning). Perhaps he means an “atheist” rather than a “secular” view is problematic (and I would agree) but I personally am skeptical of the supernatural as a general rule and have a great deal of regard for human logic, though Slaughter specifically seemed to deride both of those. Having said that however, I do not believe it makes me any less of a Christian because I like to see empirical data about some claim or theory before I subscribe to it. Why should it surprise anyone that a purposeful, organized, thinking God who set down a great list of rules in His Word for humanity to follow in terms of how they should live their lives and relate to God and their fellow man would not also set down a similar set of rules for the rest of Creation as well? Human logic (which also should be noted was created in the image and likeness of The Almighty) is a God given tool whereby humanity might better understand the workings of the Creation and thereby also better understand the Creator himself. I think it notable that when Slaughter had his heart attack (described in the text) he did not immediately make phone calls to Billy Graham and James Dobson to rush to the hospital and commence a laying of hands. Rather he trusted the human logic of the human doctors to perform open heart surgery and remove the blockage. Now this is not to say the supernatural (i.e. miracles) cannot occur (why should it surprise anyone that He who made the rules can also bend them or break them?) but neither is a certain amount of skepticism about the supernatural nor a reliance on the God-given gift of human reason necessarily a representation of a lack of belief or faith.
In conclusion, though I think the text does in fact have a number of minor contradictions and I am no fan at all of his depiction of “worldview”, overall I think Slaughter’s proscriptions for a life full of momentum are mostly sound. A leader must discipline him or herself before being in a position to try and discipline anyone else. It is vitally important to have a plan, maintain focus without distraction on a clear vision for the future, and yet allocate time and effort appropriately so relationships are not adversely affected. It is difficult to argue with his assertion that the successful execution of any vision demands adequate personal health to see it through to fruition. Finally, for the faithful Christian, I agree that whatever the focus, in order to be fulfilled in all of one’s labors individuals must always meditate on the will of God and how best to execute the plan he has in store for the life of each person.
August 2, 2017
Excellent Information
Pastor Slaughter provides great advice and instruction within these pages. It is spot on in many different areas. Tools for helping readers turn great ideas into sustainable transformation would make this an even stronger book.
Pastor Slaughter provides great advice and instruction within these pages. It is spot on in many different areas. Tools for helping readers turn great ideas into sustainable transformation would make this an even stronger book.
October 27, 2017
Convicting book.
June 5, 2013
I read this book along with other members of my Sunday school class. I really appreciated getting to discuss it with others, but I think I would have benefited even if that had not been the case. My one gripe is that Michael Slaughter uses his own church as an example of a place doing EVERYTHING right, and that got a bit tiresome. But I really liked it and I would like to read more of his work.
February 6, 2023
This book is a way to look at creating a better you to serve God's purpose--physically, mentally, and spiritually. It is well written with personal examples from the author. While I read it by myself, it may be best read in conjunction with a group.
Warning--read it with a group, only if you want to be held accountable and pushed to make progress.
Warning--read it with a group, only if you want to be held accountable and pushed to make progress.
Read
September 5, 2011Love Love this book....Mike hit the nail on the head....with no momentum we return to our safe zones and fall back into a routine that may work for us for now but not lead us to where we wish to be. With Momentum and continual practice and guidance we can use momentum for our benefit.
November 18, 2012
This book was assigned to me by my doctoral college for our first class. I was not excited to read it but I have to admit I found some worthwhile insight. I especially recommend this book for anyone who needs motivation to loose a few spare pounds.
Read
June 10, 2012AWESOMENESS
May 29, 2009
I discovered no fresh insight in this book.
Displaying 1 - 9 of 9 reviews