Thanks for all three replies, gentlemen!

Anonymous, the biggest importance of such early testimony is that it refutes the commonly held notion that resurrection belief was a late, legendary development.

Darrell, glad to be of help.

Steven, reinforcing Darrell's comments, "flesh and blood" was a stock rabbinic idiom for "mere mortal."  E.g., hundreds of rabbinic parables begin with the expression, "there was a king of flesh and blood" to indicate that the story is first of all about an earthly rather than heavenly king, or even a messianic one.  "Spiritual body" translates soma pneumatikon, which as 1 Corinthians 2-3 shows, when contrasted with a "natural body" (soma psychikon) means "supernatural," or "Spirit-empowered," not non-physical.

 For further detail, see N. T. Wright's massive demonstration in The Resurrection of the Son of God (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2003) that first-century Jews had no conception of resurrection except for physically embodied forms.  Paul need not go into details because everyone would have understood what he was talking about.