The concept of the soul in Christian literature and tradition has a complex history. Moreover, Christian thought about its destiny is by no means uniform, nor is it always even clear.
Terminology
The New Testament word psuchē is rooted in the Hebrew nefesh, and in English both are generally translated "soul." In primitive Semitic thought nefesh (Arabic, nafs) is a fine, diminutive replica of the body. As such it can be contrasted with ruaḥ, an onomatopoeic word that mimics the sound of breathing and is used to designate the spirit or principle of life that in such thought is seen in the breath, which stands in contrast to the flesh. The New Testament word psuchē, however, has complex overtones associated with the concept of life, sometimes also signifying what today would be called the self and often assuming a special connotation as the seat of the supernatural or eternal life, the life that cannot be destroyed by the malice of humans as can the body, yet can be destroyed by God (Mt. 10:39). So valuable is the psuchē that not even the whole of the material universe could compensate for its loss (Mt. 16:26, Mk. 8:36ff.).
When the psuchē is fully dedicated to God it acquires a special character (1 Pt. 1:22, 4:19), and in this dedication it can be anchored in God and be aware of possessing eternal life, assured of salvation from all that could alienate it from that inheritance (Heb. 6:19). Such is the "soul" or "self" that is under the care of Christ. Yet since the psuchē is spiritual, not material, it is not to be guarded as one guards an earthly mansion, nor to be placed like a precious heirloom in a safe deposit box, nor tended as one tends a delicate plant. On the contrary, Jesus urges his disciples to let go of it, abandoning it to God's care (Mt. 16:25, Mk. 8:35, Lk. 9:24, Jn. 12:25). Such is the paradox of self-giving, a concept that finds expression also in Hindu and Buddhist thought.
In the New Testament then, the psuchē, although fundamentally rooted in a Hebrew concept, encompasses so much of what is today understood as the "self" that it confronts one with many of the very complex problems to be found in modern discussions of selfhood. Yet the term carries also other connotations, as shall be seen later. Furthermore, in its adjectival form, psuchikos, it can be used to designate the natural, biological life of humans, as distinguished from the spiritual life, which is called pneumatikos (1 Cor. 2:14, 15:46; Jude 19). The dualistic distinction implied in this usage echoes one that is familiar to readers of gnostic literature. Psuchē, however, .....