Did the Greek philosophical influence conflate what early Christians accepted as what the soul and spirit are? Was there a switch in definition?
The soul is not the image of God in Genesis 1, especially if your use of spirit is the original purpose of soul. The shell was in the image of God. After the Flood no one had knowledge of what God’s image was. One reason why men were not to carve just any image and worship it as God. It does not matter to me what term is used as what as long as all understand the differences in function.
My take in keeping with the Bible both OT and NT is: God created the shell out of dust in God’s image. God breathed, animated the body with a soul. We are not the shell, and we are no longer the image of God. How do we define the image of God, if we have no clue of what it looks like or actually is? God stressed that throughout Scripture that no living human could ever view nor have contact with God’s image.
I think humans decided to identify the image of God with the term Angel because the meaning was messenger which the function of the image of God actually was. It was direct communication with God. It is also closely related to the concept of sons of God. Not just a familiar nor genetic relationship, but a direct communication relationship.
The image is neither a soul or spirit in function, but if God is a spirit being, then the image would be of spirit as well. It is also the eternal part, because God claims the soul that sins, shall die. God struggled with human spirit, but the soul would forever be seperated if sin was the only thing the soul could do.
We still have a fleshly body which is not us, but will go back to dust.
We are only the soul and spirit in function. Currently we have no control over the spirit, because God has separated us from us to stop the struggle. Jesus was provided to restore us to our spirit.
So the Greeks introduced mind into the mix way before Christianity. They needed something to differentiate between physical and spiritual. They were not even sure which bodily organ to use.
To be truly dualistic one would have to have control of soul and spirit. Because the soul is as you describe an extension of the physical body. Even though it seems separate it was not what the Greeks were shooting for. Since the goal was to get to the spirit, and they probably did not read the Hebrew’s version of creation in Genesis they only identified the soul. Thus we are stuck with a split physical definition and property and not the contrast with the physical and spiritual. Are we spiritual with just a soul?
Is changing the word soul in Genesis to spirit correct though? If you view the function as a seperate physical entity, how can it mean spirit? The flesh was animated, but the input of the soul can only be physical or both, but can never be strictly spirit. If the soul is just animation of the physical it does not follow that it made dust something that it could never be. The dust was changed in form when “turned into the image” but was still physical, and the animation is what makes you you. At what point are you you generations after God created multiple humans both male and female?