The only difference between Christian universalists like me and Gary is the classic Universalist interpretation of the original word Owlam (in Hebrew) or its equivalent, Aion (in Greek) & their derivations.
The difference is:
1. Gary belongs to the interpretation that Olam/Aion takes its meaning from the subject it is applied to. As an example, ‘Olam God’ may be thus translated as ‘Eternal God’ against its ‘literal’ meaning of ‘age-during’ simply because the ‘eternity’ is derived from the ‘subject it is applied to’ (God in this case) and not vice versa.
2.I belong to the ‘literal’ interpretation group where we just accept the above as ‘age-during God’. This does not mean that after the ‘age’ God dies, but rather that His existence is ‘highlighted’ for the ‘age’ (the time period for the OT or NT testaments, respectively – which is, a singular ‘age’ only). This is to say that the ‘existence’ of God is celebrated/highlighted to the ‘end’ of that ‘covenant’ (age). It is also somewhat similar to the non-time related phrase “God of Abraham” or “God of Israel”. Everyone knows that the two titles prior do not exclude God being the “God of All” and neither should the phrase ‘age-during God’ exclude Him from ‘living in All Times’!