RE: growth potential

WOW!!!  I agree totally with your last statement about relevance.  And I think that is the core.  A new church is much more apt to relevant because it is designed to by such by the church planter typically but it is possible to plant a church that has all the same problems of relevancy, IFF, the folks that come from the parent church in the antioch model do not come with clean DNA and a commitment to relevance.  Also, a new plant only remains relevant until someone says, "We don't do things around here like that, never have."  At that point it is time to refocus.  The marks of the healthiest, largest and longest term relevant churches are the ones that are able to critically evaluate themselves and change as necessary sometimes on  a dime.  The clearest example is Granger Community Church this year in ditching their Wednesday night believers service which worshiped 1000 folks for 3 bible studies.  The had set an internal figure of about 500 I think to be a success.  The had 2700 the first night. Ability to remain flexible is very important.  Hold some things tightly (our doctrinal standard, our Wesleyan Arminian Theology, our history and commitment to practical holiness and social holiness, etc.) but other things loosely (worship styles, orders, agendas, pedagalogical theories and paradigms, and certainly locations).  Let us not forget Ecclesiates, "for everything a season."