More notes to make on this topic.
Forever and ever
Some universalists will argue that forever doesn't necessarily mean forever and that is true, it doesn't. But that depends on the context of the passages in question.
The biggest problem with this argument against hell being eternal is that it is inconsistent with heaven being eternal. As I and others have said, If hell is not eternal? Why should heaven be considered as eternal? Why is it OK for one to be eternal, but not the other? If hell is not eternal, then heaven itself is also a temporary abode, if we were to accept the idea that Hell is temporary.
There is an interesting article on this matter that I recommend looking at by Eric N Langstrom:
I would also recommend this article by Ronnie LittleJohn on the subject of Hebrew time for further information:
See also my papers on the church fathers regarding the eternal nature of hell
Can heresy be condemned?
Despite the varying views of universalism, they all have the consistent point that all will eventually be saved, whether a person is saved after death via Jesus Christ or believe all paths lead to God, How can they contest doctrines to be false? There is a level of inconsistency here that is often not taken into consideration.
A charge of heresy cannot be made from their tongues consistently and it baffles me if and when someone in the universalist camp does that. How does it even work?
A question to the Universalists, Why do you believe non-universalists are wrong when in the end it doesn't matter? Or does it matter?
More comments may be made in the future and a possible expansion on forever and ever if the Lord Wills.