I am currently reading a book by David H. J. Gay entitled Particular Redemption and the Free Offer (Biggleswade, UK: Brachus,20008), a book written to promote the theory of the Well-Meant Offer, or the Neo-Amyraldian position that God desires the salvation of ALL MEN. I guess I shouldn't be expecting much in terms of logical consistency, but this eats the cake.
In attempting to refute the "Owenite" position of "sufficient for all because of the worth of Christ's person", but "efficient only for the elect" (of which I hold to a variation), Gay states:
Of course, as I have noted, the work of Christ is of infinite worth, and of course he is an all-sufficient Savior — a perfect Redeemer for all the elect, for all their sins, for ever. But this does not mean we can — or should — speculate about its 'sufficiency for all'. In fact, I repeat, however fine it sounds, the concept is, in the end, illogical and meaningless (p. 101)
Gay might as well says that he believes that the sky is blue and not blue at the same time in the same place. Such illogicity shows the utter intellectual bankruptcy of the position of the Well-Meant Offer men.