If Creation as Incarnation means that we're already the cosmic Body of Christ, protologically, doesn't a question beg, eschatologically: What's it all about, Alfie?
Personally, per our tropoi, what are we becoming, cosmotheandrically?
If Creation is Incarnation, then, both the natural union of participation, which deifies Christ's humanity, as well as the hypostatic identity of perichoresis, which by virtue of the generation of opposites makes the world the cosmic Body of Christ, are protological events.
Essentially, per logoi, human nature with its relative perfections remains an inviolable, hence unwounded, image of God, which, in each person, embeds a sufficiently free will & adequately illuminated intellect, which together allow us to both aspire to & attain a vision beatific. This freedom remains possible - not inspite of, but - precisely because of our epistemic & axiological distancing. It also necessarily introduces the possibility of both virtuous & vicious acts & habits, the latter which will require purgative graces.
If we're already the cosmic Body of Christ, protologically, an obvious question will beg, eschatologically: Personally, per our tropoi, what are we becoming, cosmotheandrically? Which is to ask: What does growing from image to likeness involve?
In short, we can expand our freedom, grow in intimacy, broaden our aesthetic scope, and, superabundantly, both multiply our theophanic manifestations & deepen our beatific enjoyments.
Theosis, then, involves our self-determined, synergic growth in likeness, eschatologically & epectatically. Apokatastasis involves that universal invitation to theosis to which we can freely assent in terms of degrees, which will concommitantly match various grades of glory vis a vis beatific enjoyments of both primary & secondary beatitudes.
Apokatastenai involves purgations, including both active & passive, which restore our original beatitude, essential freedom & basic intellect.
I cover these speculative stances exhaustively here in my Neo-Chalcedonian Cosmotheandric Universalism
reply to Tom Belt:
I receive Scotus & Maximus as our libertarian allies, Bracken as our antidote to nominalistic process approaches (& tweaker of Bulgakovian insights), Clarke's thin passibility per esse naturale-intentionale distinction as compatible w/our aesthetic intensity/scope, all cohering w/our universalism.
I affirm Creation as Incarnation = We're already the cosmic Body of Christ. That's not "open." What's wholly determined for me is Maritain's apokatastenai of imagoes Dei, whether by active post-mortem purgation or passive ephemeralization (phantasm-like annihilation of vicious secondary natures, which, lacking divine synergies, fail to enjoy the eternalization that our virtuous natures do). Soteriologically, done deal. Abundance assured - theophanically & beatifically - for all.
Such purgative graces are no more repugnant to or prejudicial of my libertarian conception of freedom than are those of justification, Thomist predestination, post-mortem impeccability or any other volitional dynamic grounded in our natural inclination to The Good.
Epistemic distancing closures, epectatic apokatastasis, theotic & sophiological dynamics may all be gifted by either co-determined synergic assent (ordinarily, like w/ sanctifying grace) or absence of refusal (extraordinarily, like w/justifying grace ). This all remains everlastingly "open."
Apokatastenai divinely determines WHAT we abudantly & sufficiently are via generation of opposites (Logos - logoi), guaranteed, sealed by the Holy Spirit, first fruits, earnest, all as a down payment to images of God on that everlasting apokatastatic - epectatic - theotic dynamic , which is the open invitation to become likenesses of God, whereby we synergistically co-self-determine HOW we shall supersufficiently theophanically manifest & HOW MUCH we shall superabundantly beatifically enjoy God, others, cosmos & self.