The initial objection that this understanding implies God got it wrong, that he had a plan and it went sour and was thus forced into a corner, seems actually backwards. This understanding presupposes, with scriptural basis I would add (more than appears in that summary article), that God’s plan has always been for his created human beings to exercise wise rule over his creation, bearing his image therein (an ‘image’ of a god is a decidedly ANE concept that is reflected in contemporary literature to Genesis 1, although Genesis 1 dissents from this in several very important ways: human beings themselves are the image of God instead of graven images placed in a temple, or kings, for example).
It is a fact that human sin entered the picture and fouled things up (Gen 3). (This is where your objection “He wouldn’t need to renew it because He’d make it right the first time” comes up short; he needs to renew human beings, or at the very least their souls; does that mean the way he created them originally was inadequate?) And because of sin “the entire creation”—not just the man and woman—was now placed under bondage, under a curse; and because of this curse it would now be corruptible, subject to decay (for more on this, see Paul in Romans 8:18-25).
Now the question remained, would God’s plan be thwarted by human sin? Or would he in his righteousness overcome this impediment in the end? Would he just give up on this recent creation business with mankind ruling over it, and revoke his covenant with creation, throwing it in the proverbial trash can? Or would he work in vast wisdom and restorative justice to bring order back to his inherently good cosmos? The Old Testament speaks much of this restorative justice and deliverance (see, for instance, Psalm 96).
I would suggest that narrowly seeing the final destination for ‘my soul’ as escaping an inherently evil physical creation and body that God gives up on and gets rid of, bringing souls off to a—for all practical purposes—disembodied ‘heaven’, amounts to a rather gnostic, individualistic, and anti-Genesis-one concept, when one gets right down to it. That God got it wrong, he had a plan and it went sour and was thus forced into a corner and could do nothing to redeem it, so he was forced to break his covenant with creation and utterly destroy it, rescuing human souls from the mess by taking them to be with him in heaven, seems to me to be problematic, at the very least. This in my judgment is where what has now in modern times become the “traditional” view is found wanting.
Psalm 148:6 tells us of the heavens that were created, including the sun, moon, and the shining stars, that Yahweh “established them so they would endure; he ISSUED A DECREE THAT WILL NOT BE REVOKED.” Now that they have been created they are enjoined, as the rest of creation is, to praise their creator. Wouldn’t obliterating forever the heavens and the sun, moon, and stars within them (a misreading of 2 Peter 3) be revoking his decree?
Too, is not being a soul stripped of its body for eternity merely a definition of death itself? Think about it carefully. (What Paul calls the “spiritual body” in 1 Corinthians 15 is a “body,” which I think we would be in agreement on for the most part, and it is the _same_ body as the “natural,” vv.42-44, just transformed and made incorruptible, etc., by being sown as a seed, dying, and sprouting up with these new characteristics, the model for this being Jesus’ own body as it was raised.)
On the other hand, the creator God working in remarkable ways through history to redeem his creation (cf. Rom 8:19-21) and actually succeeding in it, victoriously swallowing up death forever by transforming our corruptible bodies into incorruptible and glorified bodies like Jesus’, and birthing creation anew just like he does with individual Christians, joining heaven with earth and filling it with his presence, removing the curse, and giving human beings eternal reign on the new earth (cf. Rev 5:9-10; 21:1-22:5), demonstrates his awesome power, rule, great wisdom, and faithfulness to his covenant he made with creation (cf., e.g., Jeremiah 31:35-36; 33:25-26) in a way that is unprecedented and unimaginably wise.
 This is a short response written to answer the objection that if God is going to redeem the cosmos (the entire creation) then it appears that God failed, because he did not make it good enough the first time.