We agree on the infinite aspect of the universe, Bill.

In my words: Space is infinite, so the universe as a whole is infinite. Matter is finite, so we will find that matter shows us its limits, not just at the individual (individuated) level, but also at the entire collective level of matter (which is never some kind of 1, but always a model in which all individuated matter is moving on their own non-collective accord at the universal level). But... I have no problem with infinite to describe the spatial reality of the universe.

With the word eternal we have a problem to solve.

One cannot declare something to be eternal when the original starting point of the universe as a whole is not known. We only have data when matter first appeared (13.8 billion years is the standard idea).

We have no data when energy first appeared, or when time and space had their first appearance.

We cannot meld matter, energy, time and space into one event when all we have is the starting point for matter. Only an eight-year old would have no problems with melding all in one.

So, are you interested in duking it out on the word eternal, because it tells me you claim something you cannot claim, Bill. If there is a beginning to matter, then eternal is not the appropriate word to use for the universe.