your post betrays a lack of knowledge of the stance of the church over the centuries.
Okay, how many university/seminary courses have you taken in "Church history"?
I've taken one online course, based on the two-volume "The Story of Christianity" by Justo Gonzalez. I've also read many of the ECF's independently.
So I'm curious as to what is the your background that gives us reason to trust your opinions?
Calvinism is a splinter group with its own particular slant on the Bible which the majority of Christianity have never embraced.
Well, let's see....
There are many significant themes in Augustine's writings (especially his later writings) which match modern Calvinism. That's one of the reasons why both Calvin and Luther (who were both Augustinians), came away from this teaching.
We see ideas similar to Calvinism in the Jansenist movement, as well as the writings of Thomas Aquinas.
We also see a number of ECF's teaching Limited Atonement in their writings.
And the "explosion" of Christianity, the time of the Reformation, coincided with the invention of Gutenberg's printing press, and once the Bible came readily available to the common people in their own language (English, German, French, etc.), and they were able to read the Bible for themselves, instead of having to trust what Rome told them, they ended up discovering that it taught what is nicknamed, "Calvinism" (which is precisely what happened to me 30 years ago, as well).
It does not mean that calvinism is wrong, but to puff yourself up thinking you are in the majority on these things is contray to the truth.
The poster gave no indication of being "puffed up", nor did he claim "the majority" (which is a logical fallacy).
You are supporting a minority view.
"Many are called, FEW are chosen".
"NARROW is the gate, and FEW there be who find it."
Frankly, I don't see the problem....
We are.
but you are not in the majority
Fortunately for others, Arminians will also be saved. You don't have to score 100% a theology exam in order to be saved.