Soteriology — the doctrine of salvation — enters the depth-psychology corpus not as a dogmatic category to be defended but as a structural problem that psychological thought must interrogate, re-describe, or appropriate. The corpus discloses at least four distinct registers in which soteriological thinking operates. First, the Eastern Orthodox tradition, especially as mediated through the Philokalia and thinkers such as Maximos the Confessor, articulates theosis — deification through participation in the divine Logos — as a soteriology in which individual transformation and cosmic restoration are inseparable; this stream directly informs depth-psychological readings of individuation as a sacred process. Second, Gnostic soteriology, examined through Jonas, King, and Dihle, poses the problem of whether salvation is given by nature (physei) or achieved through moral and cognitive effort — a tension that recapitulates in depth-psychological form as the debate between deterministic and voluntaristic models of psychic change. Third, Schopenhauer’s pessimistic soteriology, recovered by Sharpe and Ure, grounds redemption in the negation of the will, a position that shadows Jungian notions of ego-sacrifice. Fourth, Miller’s polytheistic reading relocates Atonement theories within Greek mythological structures, dissolving soteriological uniqueness into archetypal recurrence. The result is a corpus in which soteriology functions as a hinge between theological anthropology, cosmology, and the psychology of transformation.