There are quite a few Reformed believers who hold to the view that the atonement is sufficient for all, but efficient for only the elect.
Personally, when I hear/read that I can't help but think that their sufficiency argument is just a waste of words. They acknowledge like others in the Reformed community that only the elect will come to saving faith. Yet, they add that the atonement is sufficient to save all.
I would agree with this line of reasoning if the atonement was meant for all; yet the fact is if the atonement was meant all. All would come to saving knowledge.
This to me seems like a no brainer, yet those who argue for sufficiency/efficiency don't seem to see a contradiction in this.
Call me confused, because even CH Spurgeon believed the sufficiency/efficiency argument.

What am I missing?

Tom