Just pointing out, there are people who have put you on block (I call it the “foe-list” because that’s what the system software calls it), who are watching to see if you’ve improved any when people quote you and reply to you. (I’m sure the same is true for Ran and SoW, btw; they aren’t the most popular members around here either, and I know some members who have foed them, too. I expect there are some people to whom this thread looks like one gigantic black hole. 
)
First, I’m not so sure it’s such a minute class; in my experience, a lot of Christians at least want to hope securely for the salvation of all sinners from sin, and in practice do hold out that hope for people they themselves love (at least). Might even be a majority of Christians, who knows? (I pointed out in an article a few years ago, that the results of two Southern Baptist seminary polls, intended to gauge proportional relations between Arminianistic and Calvinistic teaching in graduates going into ministry positions, surprisingly pointed to at least 1/3 graduates taking a position tantamount to universalism: affirming one key Calv doctrine while denying another in favor Arm instead.)
Second, I’m a Protestant, so I’m already in a minority (both presently and throughout all Christian history) when it comes to being in a class of believers. If I was going to be swayed decisively by a majority headcount, I’d be Roman Catholic (the present and all-time majority since the Great Schism) or at least Eastern Orthodox (depending on whether I thought they or the RCCs best reflect the pre-schism majority back through the 1st century.)
Last time I checked, you weren’t in the RCC either. So, does it concern you that you belong to a definite minority of believers?–keeping in mind that whatever particular branch of Protestantism you follow is itself only a fraction of Protestantism (and unless you’re Southern Baptist, a minority fraction at that)?
If you answer that you’re only talking about being in the small minority in regard to one particular doctrine, I answer that we’re both in the (relatively) small minority in regard to various particular doctrines held by the RCC and/or the EOx. Nor does (or should) that obscure the huge agreements we all have (RCC, EOx and orthodox trinitarian Protestant) on more basic theology.
Anyway, playing the majority card is quite shortsighted. That, or you should go start taking RCC catechism as soon as possible in order to make sure that you yourself are definitely in the majority when it comes to all doctrines. 
Then you can come back and challenge me on majority doctrine from a stance of actually being in the majority communion.
(Note: if you’re actually in full communion with the RCC and I somehow missed that over all the months you’ve been here, my apologies. Let me know and I’ll retract this part of my answer. 
)
Second-and-a-half: my basic theological disagreements with Mormons and JHs, have exactly NOTHING to do with their relative minority among people trying to follow Jesus. As far as I’m concerned, picking on them with that argument would be equivalent to trying to bully someone smaller than myself simply because they were smaller. Might, including majority might, does not make right, even when I’m the one in the majority. I would never throw that against them; I have more honor than that.
Third: even the apostles themselves had trouble understanding and accepting some doctrines of Christ; a trouble that persisted for at least one of them (St Peter) into the post-Resurrection apostolic ministry, and thus into the period of being taught by the Holy Spirit. Which, by the way, is one reason why Protestants protest that highest-rank church teaching (even by the Pope, as the first Pope himself demonstrated at least twice in the scriptural record itself), even on matters of faith and practice, is not intrinsically infallible. That includes highest-rank Protestant church teaching, too, in case you hadn’t heard. (Including me, for that matter!–I don’t consider myself to be infallible in my understanding and teaching either. How about you?)
Consequently, if I discover reason to believe that the majority of Christian teachers are wrong about a doctrinal interpretation of scripture, then I am not in some kind of panic of concern. There was a time, you know (or maybe you don’t know) when Arminianism per se was very definitely in the minority compared to Calvinism among Protestants; but that didn’t stop you from changing your mind to Arm from Calv. If you had lived under the reign of the Calvinist Reformers and came to believe Arminianistic theology was correct (on those few points where it differs from Calv theology per se), and a Calvinist (or a Roman Catholic for that matter!) came to you, not even addressing your actual beliefs, much less your actual reasons thereof, but challenging you merely on a matter of majority: how concerned would you be?
For what it’s worth, though: I was concerned enough that, for most of my life I did not believe universalism to be true (even if in some parts of my heart I wanted it to be true); and I was concerned enough that, for several years after I first saw strong evidence pointing toward its truth, I resolved not to publicly promote it until and unless I saw stronger credence for it from the scriptures than I did at that time. I am extremely careful in taking the positions I take, not least because there are people who read what I write not having the time, skill or resources to do the research and the logical math themselves. But also, and even more importantly, because I love God and so I want to rightly praise Him and rightly want to represent Him to other people (both of which are implied in the compound word ortho-doxy), whether in the Church Universal or out of it.
)
But my precept has always been, that if I am not being helpful then people should definitely drop me–just as one of my teachers, Lewis, used to say.
