In the finance and economic world, there are a lot of theories and models. Someone engaging the free markets certainly appreciates these elements. For example, a trader may make use of the Black-Scholes model to define his or her risk on a trade that is theoretically unlimited in risk. The Black-Scholes model is a pricing model for derivatives, but it may also serve as a guide to determine a range of how far a particular security is likely to move within a certain time. However, at the end of the day, theories are not enough to pay the bills. Theory is sterile enough to be devastated on occasion by theoretically highly improbable events and so an experienced trader would take into account ways of mitigating that risk. In the end, theory is always appreciated but what is done is what is pays the bills.
The spiritual resurrection of Jesus that denies a physical resurrection could be likened to a theory that lacks the power to pay the bills. When I read the passages on Jesus’ appearances I do not get the impression that they were talking about a spiritually resurrected Jesus devoid of a physically resurrected body. The apostle Paul’s writings on our own resurrection and glorification does not give me that impression either. The resurrections about which I read in the New Testament look like they involve resurrections of persons with physical bodies. In essence, if Jesus’ resurrection was solely spiritual, I see no reason why the early church was so obsessed with the second advent of Jesus, who was said to return in similar manner to they way he ascended, or why they would endure martyrdom for the belief in Jesus and his resurrection.
It seems to me that the early church’s belief in the physical resurrection of Jesus, the eyewitnesses testimonies to a Jesus with a physical body, and the willingness to die for this Jesus indicates that a physical resurrection was something that actually happened and it was what paid the bills, so to speak.