Thomas' Expectations & Paul's Unique Statements

John 20:24-25 from New World Translation:

But Thomas, one of the twelve, who was called The Twin, was not with them when Jesus came. Consequently the other disciples would say to him: “We have seen the Lord!” But he said to them: “Unless I see in his hands the print of the nails and stick my finger into the print of the nails and stick my hand into his side, I will certainly not believe.”

The apostle Thomas, as a good (but faith-lacking) Jew, expected a bodily resurrection from which he expected to see the "print of the nails" "in [Jesus'] hands" and be able to "stick [his] finger into" Jesus' side. Thomas probably expected the corpse of the dead to be raised from his reading of Isaiah 26:19:

“Your dead ones will live. A corpse of mine—they will rise up. Awake and cry out joyfully, YOU residents in the dust! For your dew is as the dew of mallows, and the earth itself will let even those impotent in death drop [in birth].

Since Thomas probably knew that it was the "corpse" that would "rise up," he expected to see Jesus' body raised. Whether his expectations were right or wrong is another matter that I won't get into. However, many have pointed out, and Witnesses are not alone in this, that Jesus could have materialized a body so that Thomas would "stop being unbelieving but become believing." (John 20:27) But even here, Jesus would have ran the risk of unintentionally leading Thomas to a conclusion that was, well, wrong. 

2 Corinthians 12:1-3 from New World Translation:

I have to boast. It is not beneficial; but I shall pass on to supernatural visions and revelations of [the] Lord. I know a man in union with Christ who, fourteen years ago—whether in the body I do not know, or out of the body I do not know; God knows—was caught away as such to the third heaven. Yes, I know such a man—whether in the body or apart from the body, I do not know, God knows— 

Paul, speaking of himself in the third person, says that he was "caught away as such to the third heaven." The remarkable aspect of this, for our purposes, is the statement of "whether in the body I do not know." This statement implies, even suggests, that it was not at all beyond Jewish understanding for a man, that is, for a human to be "in the body" and be "caught away" to the "third heaven." In other words, a man in heaven was not an unthinkable idea; though it certainly is a difficult one. So if Jesus was raised bodily, which I am neither arguing for nor arguing against, it is not at all unthinkable to Paul.

1 Corinthians 15:44 from New World Translation:

It is sown a physical body, it is raised up a spiritual body. If there is a physical body, there is also a spiritual one. [NWT Footnote with respect to "physical": Or, “soulical.” Gr., psy‧khi‧kon′; Lat., a‧ni‧ma′le.]

If we understand "physical body" to mean a "soulical body" or an "animal body," then this appears to be paralleled to 1 Corinthians 15:50 where "flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God." This would mean that "physical body"="flesh and blood." Paul does not leave us clueless with respect to what "flesh and blood" means:

(1 Corinthians 15:50) However, this I say, brothers, that flesh and blood cannot inherit God’s kingdom, neither does corruption inherit incorruption. 

The above verse is color-coded in corresponding or parallel thoughts. That is, "flesh and blood"="corruption" and "God's kingdom"="incorruption." If this is correct, then, the "soulical" or "physical" body is "corruption." Being consistent and following the same train-of-thought, it would follow that "spiritual body" is "incorruption."  This would appear, once more, to be speaking of functionality as opposed to ontology. 

However, perhaps just as equally, the opposite of all the above could be argued. "Flesh and blood" means physical humans and thus a "physical body." And a "spiritual body" would be in contrast to a "physical body"; that is, it would be non-physical. Once more, this would probably be the most literal meaning of the text.

One difficulty with the latter view, however, is that the same Greek word for "spiritual" is used elsewhere in Paul and does not denote non-physicality. 

1 Corinthians 2:13

These things we also speak, not with words taught by human wisdom, but with those taught by [the] spirit, as we combine spiritual [matters] with spiritual [words].

Many other versions instead of having "spiritual [words]" have "spiritual people." The reason for this is that the last "spiritual" is an adjective which implies a noun. The New World Translation understood "spiritual" to be modifying something other than humans. Both are legitimate. However, even here "spiritual [matters]" does not necessarily imply non-physicality and "spiritual people" doesn't mean that they are not human.

1 Corinthians 3:1

And so, brothers, I was not able to speak to YOU as to spiritual men, but as to fleshly men, as to babes in Christ. . .

Here, "spiritual men" does not mean that these "men" are not human or physical but Paul is describing the status of being "spiritual" opposed to being "fleshly." 

A conclusion that we could draw, then, is that "spiritual body" does not necessitate non-physicality based on the use of "spiritual" elsewhere in Paul; though, of course, it can mean non-physicality as well!

The reason there are so many different beliefs across all denominations, as BeDuhn said in the interview, is because of ambiguities in the text. We are not first century Jews nor first century Gentiles and therefore cannot know with 100% certainty what Paul meant. We can't ask him personally, "Hey, Paul, what did you mean by 'spiritual body'?" The best we can do, if we assume the Scriptures are harmonious, is try to harmonize all the relevant passages and see what makes the best sense in light of its first century Jewish and Graeco-Roman context.