Did Jesus Die on The Cross for The Just/Elect/Saved Whose Names Are Written in The Book of Life OR

The damned are those who used their "Free Will" to reject God.

Each and every person once fell into this category. We could only will to do that which was evil in the sight of God. Why? Because we are all led by a corrupt heart which cannot please God in any way!

However, God sent his only son to die for our sins. Through His death and resurrection, our sins were paid in full! In addition to that, the Spirit worked within us giving us a new heart to enable us to believe and have faith in our savior. This was a gift, and was given to His elect only – that no man may boast!

What kind of strange English is that???

Here is a far better translation of that verse -- in context: Aware that his disciples were grumbling about this, Jesus said to them, “Does this offend you? Then what if you see the Son of Man ascend to where he was before! The Spirit gives life; the flesh counts for nothing. The words I have spoken to you—they are full of the Spirit and life. Yet there are some of you who do not believe.” For Jesus had known from the beginning which of them did not believe and who would betray him. He went on to say, “This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless the Father has enabled them.” John 6:61-65

"When he had made purification of sins" This is an aorist middle participle which emphasizes the subject (middle voice) and describes a completed act (aorist tense, cf. Heb. 7:27; 9:12,28; 10:10). Jesus has acted on behalf of sinful mankind (cf. Mark 10:45; 2 Cor. 5:21).

The term "purification" is used in the NT in several senses.
1. ceremonial cleansing (cf. Luke 2:22; 5:14; John 2:6)
2. physical healing (cf. Mark 1:44)
3. a metaphor for expiation (cf. Heb. 1:3; 2 Pet. 1:9, so says William D. Mounce in his Analytical Lexicon to the Greek New Testament, p. 257)

We get the English word "catharsis" from this Greek term.
Notice the descriptive phrase "of sins." There are two possible ways to understand this phrase: (1) it is objective genitive "of sins," not ablative "from sins."

Jesus' death dealt with the sin problem; (2) it is plural which does not imply mankind's Adamic nature, "the sin problem," but individual acts of sin. Jesus dealt with the guilt of mankind's rebellion (past and present).

This textual option is accepted by the UBS4 scholars, but there is another possibility. In the Alexandrian textual family represented by P46 the phrase "through himself" (dia heautou) occurs instead of "His" (autou), which makes it refer to the previous clause. This same type of manuscript variant is found in 1 John 5:18b. It is interesting that this "through himself" is lacking in other early Alexandrian textual family representatives (א and B). It is surely possible that orthodox scribes feared that the phrase "through himself made purification of sins" might lead to gnostic speculation and changed "di'heautou" to "autou." For a more complete discussion of the tendencies of orthodox scribes see Bart D. Ehrman's, The Orthodox Corruption of Scripture, Oxford Press, 1993.

"He sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high" This is a figurative way of stating Jesus' finished work and exaltation (cf. Ps. 110:1; Luke 22:69). God does not have a right hand. This is a biblical metaphor (anthropomorphic) of power, authority, and preeminence. No OT priest ever sat down! Jesus' earthly work is finished. In a sense this is a kingly, royal metaphor (cf. Ps. 2; 45; and 110:1-3) linked to a priestly function (cf. Ps. 110:4 and Zechariah 4). The Dead Sea community expected two Messiahs, one priestly (i.e., line of Aaron, tribe of Levi), one kingly (i.e., line of Jesse, tribe of Judah). Jesus fulfills all three OT anointed offices: prophet (cf. Deut. 18:18), priest (cf. Ps. 110:4), and king (cf. 2 Sam. 7:13,16; Ps. 2; 110:1-3).

NASB, NKJV,
NRSV "the Majesty on high"
TEV "of God, the Supreme Power"
NJB "the divine Majesty on high"
This is a circumlocution. Jews were afraid to use God's name lest they take it in vain (cf. Exod.20:7) so they inserted many alternate terms and phrases (i.e., "Kingdom of heaven," "throne," etc.) or used the passive voice to refer to Him.
1:4 This verse seems to be a transition between Heb. 1:1-3 and Heb. 1:5-14. Today's English Version (TEV) begins the discussion of Jesus' superiority over the angels with Heb. 1:3.
The name which Jesus has been given that is greater than the angels (cf. Rom. 8:38-39; Eph. 1:21; Col. 2:15) is "son" (cf. Heb. 1:5 [twice] and 8) or "Lord" (cf. Heb. 1:10 and Phil. 2:9-11).
For "much better" see full note at Heb. 7:7.

Nothing re the elect here-
J

Not according to the Bible.

1 John 2:2, "He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world."

Nothing could be clearer than that!

Why are you changing the subject? The discussion is about whom Jesus died for, not about who has faith.

If you really wanted to reject God could you do that?

Man by nature does reject God, and he can not do it

That is simply your incorrect opinion.

Again, "1 John 2:2, "He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world."

What is it about the effect of Jesus' sacrifice for all people and some choosing to accept it that you don't understand?

P.S. You should use a better version than the King James Bible.

What kind of strange English is that???

Here is a far better translation of that verse -- in context: Aware that his disciples were grumbling about this, Jesus said to them, “Does this offend you? Then what if you see the Son of Man ascend to where he was before! The Spirit gives life; the flesh counts for nothing. The words I have spoken to you—they are full of the Spirit and life. Yet there are some of you who do not believe.” For Jesus had known from the beginning which of them did not believe and who would betray him. He went on to say, “This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless the Father has enabled them.” John 6:61-65

I'm going to make this short and sweet because I don't feel like becoming involved in a continuing dialogue.
Your problem is either simply that you do not understand what a Saviour is and does, or that Jesus is that Saviour,
and that is reflected in all of your posts - Johann's too.
Spend some time, think about it more fully, and when you really grasp it, we can talk. Until then, debate is pointless because
you don't comprehend the gospel's most foundational principle.

I agree entirely! I don't feel like discussing this with you either. I understand perfectly what a savior (not saviour!) does. Clearly you do not. You go spend some time and think about it more fully, and when you really grasp it, perhaps we can talk.

Clearly, unlike myself, you don't comprehend the gospel's most foundational principle.

Its not clear to you, but it is to me, its the elect

Sounds good to me, but just a hint: if you don't understand that Jesus alone is the one who saves and not man, then
you don't know what/who a Saviour is.

Why can't those with knowledge reject God?

Those who are in Christ will never reject God. They do however often grieve Him. Just like Peter, they take their eye off Christ and begin to sink. When we truly repent, He forgives our weakness and our fellowship with Him returns. When we ask Him how He could continue to love a sinner like us, His reply is:

Oh you of little faith! (1) I loved you before time began (2) I claimed you as my own (3) I gave you a new heart. (4) Will I now let you slip through my fingers?

Our growth through sanctification will never cease in this lifetime! However, we have the assurance that when we are judged that we will be found without spot nor wrinkle.

Well, that's not what it says! Again...
1 John 2:2, "He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world."

or if you prefer the KJV, "And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world."

The WHOLE WORLD, NOT JUST THE ELECT! Nothing could be clearer than that!

It does say it, the whole world is the elect. It doesnt say all without exception, because many are under Gods wrath

So the whole world will be saved? Or, to follow your logic, some of the elect are under God's wrath?

The whole world of the elect will be saved. None of the elect are ever under Gods wrath, only the non elect are under His wrath, and that permanently. Jn 3:36

36 He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.