Is Christ's Atonement "Limited"?

Great discussion going on over HERE.

We're taking a look at the doctrine of Limited Atonement that states that Jesus' atoning death wasn't for everyone, but only for a select few of His choosing (forgive the oversimplification).

Looking at this doctrine through 2 Peter 3:9, this passage alone seems to be very problematic for the Limited Atonement view. The verse says:

"The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance."

Peter's phrase "longsuffering to us-ward" cannot be addressed to only the elect. It must include all mankind. If not, the phrase that follows "not willing that any should perish" must apply to only the elect. But that second statement can only mean all mankind since it refers to a perishing that certainly doesn't endanger the elect.

So there are two possibilities - this is in reference to either: perishing under the penalty of sin or escaping that penalty by repenting; OR, perishing in the fire that will destroy the world or escaping it. Certainly, perishing in a world destroying fire is no more applicable to the saved than perishing under the penalty of sin.

I get that the book of 2 Peter is addressed to the 'elect', but that doesn't keep Peter from talking about God's desire to see the whole world saved - including the fate of unbelievers.

Peter may not be speaking to mankind in general in his letter, but he is certainly not speaking ONLY about the elect in his letter either.

Otherwise - Is it the elect who are the last day scoffers? Is it the elect who perished in the flood? Is it the elect to whom God is longsuffering, less they perish in the coming judgment?

Furthermore, if you believe in 'irresistible grace' that claims that God can make anyone get saved any time He wants - why would longsuffering even need to be mentioned, if talking about the elect? That would imply God is longsuffering with Himself. That would be quite odd to say the least.

Another major problem for those who interpret this verse as talking about those already saved is the redundancy: God is not willing that any of those He has sovereignly elected not to perish to perish? And He is longsuffering to accomplish this goal?

That appears to be a very difficult argument to sustain.