Wasted Suffering?

"All that Christ did for one sinner, was all that was necessary for two sinners. Right? All that Christ did for two sinners was all that was necessary for three sinners? Right? Who can deny that? So there can be no wasted suffering. Often you will hear that nonsense rejoinder from some Reformed camps. The idea of a wasted suffering only works on pecuniary terms. For example, I either don’t pay enough, and fail to obtain the commodity, or I have paid too much. The commodity was $1.20 but I paid $1.50 (and I am not talking about tip here). The expiation never works like that. Thus, if you ever hear this being tabled as an objection, in any context, it just will not work, it does not work. The very attempt to posit such a rejoinder shows that the proponent has perverted the doctrine of the expiation, converting the penal categories into crass commercial categories. And remember C Hodge, when the Bible uses pecuniary language its as metaphor to speak of possession and/or deliverance. It does not use pecuniary language to imply a literal transfer of currency. All that Christ suffered to satisfy the law against any given man, was all that was necessary to satisfy that same law against another given man, and so one; without limitation, indefinitely."

This is taken from Flynn's observations about Dabney and the Socinians on the Expiation.