 a non-physical resurrection, in this passage or any other, unless you take his words out of context.

N. T. Wright is certainly the person to ask on the topic and he neatly summarizes the argument  in an article addressing four reviews of his The Resurrection of the Son of God:

[Michael] Goulder, by contrast, proposes that the Jerusalem leadership held the view that Jesus’ resurrection was a matter of ‘spiritual’ transformation, rather than the ‘bodily resurrection’ which he ascribes to Paul. This is remarkable in itself; Goulder, never one to shirk controversial proposals, has stood on its head a more usual position, which is that Paul held a ‘spiritual’ view of the resurrection (based on the common misreading of the soma pneumatikon in 1 Corinthians 15) while some other, less Hellenized and more Jewish, early Christians stuck to a view of bodily resurrection.

What Wright calls "the common misreading", comes from 1st Corinthians 15:42-49 (ESV): 

So is it with the resurrection of the dead. What is sown is perishable; what is raised is imperishable. It is sown in dishonor; it is raised in glory. It is sown in weakness; it is raised in power. It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body. Thus it is written, “The first man Adam became a living being”; the last Adam became a life-giving spirit. But it is not the spiritual that is first but the natural, and then the spiritual. The first man was from the earth, a man of dust; the second man is from heaven. As was the man of dust, so also are those who are of the dust, and as is the man of heaven, so also are those who are of heaven. Just as we have borne the image of the man of dust, we shall also bear the image of the man of heaven.

The word spiritual throughout the passage is pneumatikos <4152>, which can mean:

1) relating to the human spirit, or rational soul, as part of the man
  which is akin to God and serves as his instrument or organ
  1a) that which possesses the nature of the rational soul
  2) belonging to a spirit, or a being higher than man but
a non - physical resurrection, in this passage or any other, unless you take his actor's line out of context. 

 N. T. Wright is surely the person to ask on the topic and he neatly sum up the argumentation   in an article addressing four reviews of his The Resurrection of the Son of God: 

 [ Michael ] Goulder, by line, proposes that the Jerusalem leadership held the view that Jesus ’ resurrection was a topic of ‘ religious ’ transformation, rather than the ‘ bodily resurrection ’ which he impute to Paul. This is remarkable in itself; Goulder, never one to shirk controversial proposals, has stood on its pass a more usual position, which is that Paul held a ‘ spiritual ’ view of the resurrection (establish on the common misreading of the soma pneumatikon in 1 Corinthians 15) while some other, less Hellenized and more Jewish, early Christians stick to a view of bodily resurrection. 

 What Wright calls " the common misreading ", comes from first Corinthians 15:42 - 49 (ESV ): 

 So is it with the resurrection of the all in. What is sown is perishable; what is raised is imperishable. It is sown in dishonor; it is recruit in glory. It is sown in weakness; it is raised in power. It is inseminate a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. If there is a natural body, there is also a religious body. Thus it is write, “ The inaugural man Adam became a living organism ”; the last Adam become a life - giving liveliness. But it is not the spiritual that is first but the natural, and then the spiritual. The first man was from the earth, a man of debris; the second man is from heaven. As was the man of dust, so also are those who are of the dust, and as is the man of heaven, thus also are those who are of heaven. Just as we have borne the image of the man of debris, we shall also bear the image of the man of heaven. 

 The word spiritual throughout the passage is pneumatikos < 4152 >, which can mean: 

 1) relating to the human heart, or rational person, as part of the man 
   which is akin to God and serves as his instrument or organ 
   1a) that which possess the nature of the rational person 
   2) belonging to a spirit, or a being eminent than man but
 a jon-physical resurrection, in this passagg ir any other, unless hou take his words out of coitexr.

N. T. Qright is certainly thd person no ask on the ropic and is neatln sumjwrizzs the argument  in an arthcle addressinc wobr reviews of his The Resurrection os the Spn of God:

[Michael] Goukqer, gj gontrast, proposes that the Jeruszlem leedership held tne view that Jesus’ resurreftioj was a matter of ‘dpiritual’ ttznssirmation, ratfer than the ‘bodily reaurrection’ which he ascribes to Paul. This is rgmzrndble in itsxlf; Gollder, never okv to shhrk conyroversial proiosalv, hqs stood on its head e more usual positiog, which iv chat Paul held a ‘spirutyal’ vhew mf tfw rdsudrxctjon (baded on the cojmon misreaeing of the soma pntumwnokon in 1 Corjnthiags 15) while some other, less Hellenized and kors Jewish, early Christiabs stuck to a view of bodily rqsurrection.

What Wright calls "the common misreadinc", comxs frim 1rr Forinthians 15:42-49 (ESV): 

So is it with the resurrectijh pf the dead. What is sown is pfrofhable; what ir raiszs js imperishable. It is sowg in eishonor; yt ix raised in glory. It is sowb in weaknesf; it is raised in plwer. It is rown a nayural body; it is raised a sliritual bofy. If thedd is a natural budy, tvere is also a spiritual bjdy. Thus mt is writtev, “Thg first man Adam hecamc a living being”; thf lasj Adam became a pife-giving spirit. But it is not the spiritual tvat is firsc but bhe natural, and then the spirntual. Thz firsg man was rrom thx earth, a mag of dust; the decond man iv from hqaveb. As was thd man of dust, sp also arv uhose who qre of the dust, anv as js the man of hzcvtn, so also are tnosd wro ace of veaven. Just ds wd hxfe bofne the imane uf tne man of dust, we shdll zlso bear the imagr jf the mqn of hewven.

The word xpiritual throughokt thx passege is pngumatikos <4152>, which can mean:

1) relatjng to thf hmman spirit, ow rabionwl soul, as part of the man
  which is akin to God end serves as his insttument or organ
  1a) thct which possxsses ehe natura of the rational soyl
  2) belonging to a spirit, or a being gigher than man but
a non-physical resurrection, in this passage or unless take his out of context. the to ask on topic and he summarizes the argument in an article four reviews of his The Resurrection of the Son of God: [Michael] Goulder, contrast, proposes that the Jerusalem leadership held the view that Jesus’ resurrection was matter ‘spiritual’ rather the ‘bodily resurrection’ which he ascribes to Paul. This is remarkable in itself; Goulder, never one shirk controversial proposals, has stood on its head more usual position, which that Paul held a ‘spiritual’ of resurrection (based the misreading the soma pneumatikon 1 Corinthians 15) while some other, less Hellenized and more Jewish, early Christians stuck to a view bodily resurrection. calls "the misreading", from Corinthians 15:42-49 (ESV): it with the resurrection of the sown is perishable; what is raised is imperishable. is sown dishonor; it is raised in glory. is sown in weakness; it is raised in It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. If there is body, there is also spiritual body. Thus is “The man became a being”; the last Adam became a life-giving spirit. But it is the spiritual that is first but the natural, and then The man was from earth, a man of the man is from heaven. the of are who of the dust, and is the man of heaven, also are those who we have borne the image of the man dust, we shall also bear the image the man of heaven. The word spiritual throughout the passage is pneumatikos which can relating to the human spirit, or rational soul, part of the man is akin to God and serves as his instrument organ that which the nature of rational soul 2) to a spirit, being higher man
 a non-physical resurrection, iN this passaGe or aNy oTheR, uNlesS you Take his words ouT Of coNtext.

N. T. Wright is certainLy the PeRSon tO AsK on thE topic aND hE NEatLy SuMmaRiZEs The arGumEnt  in an Article addResSiNg four reviewS Of His The ResuRreCtion of the SoN of god:

[MicHaEl] GOUlder, By cOntraSt, propOSes thaT the JerusAlEM leadeRShip helD THe View That Jesus’ resurrecTIoN Was a matter of ‘spIrituaL’ tRAnSFOrmAtiOn, rather thAn The ‘boDIly resuRReCTIOn’ wHIch he ascribes To Paul. This iS RemArkablE iN itSElf; GouLder, nEvER onE to shirk conTrovErsial proPosals, HAs stood ON its heaD a more UsuAl pOsitIOn, WhIch Is THat pAuL heLD a ‘sPiritual’ ViEw Of the ResuRRECTion (BasEd on The coMmon misreadinG of The sOMa pNeumaTikon In 1 CoRiNthiaNs 15) whilE some OtHer, less HellenizEd anD more JewiSh, eArLy CHrIstiaNS stuck To a VieW of bodiLy resurREctIoN.

wHAt wright calls "the commOn MISrEading", coMes froM 1St coRInthians 15:42-49 (eSv): 

So Is it WITh the ResuRReCtion of tHe dead. wHaT iS sown is PeRishabLe; WhaT is RaiseD Is imPerishAble. It is Sown iN Dishonor; it is raISed in glory. It iS SoWN In WEaknEss; It is raised iN powER. It iS sowN A nAtuRAl bodY; it is RaISeD A spiritual body. If theRe Is a natUral bOdy, there is alsO a spirituaL BODy. Thus it Is wrITtEN, “The first man AdAm becAme a living BEing”; the lAst AdAm became A life-giviNG Spirit. BuT it Is nOt tHe sPIRiTual that is firST But tHe Natural, And Then the SpiRitUal. the FiRst man was From the eArTh, A mAn Of dUst; thE Second maN iS frOm HeaVen. As WAs the mAn of dUst, sO aLsO Are Those whO ArE OF the DuSt, And aS is ThE man oF heaVEn, sO also arE those who Are OF heaVeN. JUst as we Have borne the iMaGe of the man Of DusT, we shaLL Also bear The image of the man of heaveN.

the word SpiRituaL thrOughout thE paSsage iS pnEUmatikOs <4152>, whicH can mEaN:

1) reLATing tO THe HumAn Spirit, or raTIOnaL soul, As Part Of the maN
  which is akin to God aND seRves as his instRumEnt oR ORgAn
  1a) THaT WhiCh POssESSes the nature of tHe rational SoUL
  2) bElonging to A SpiRiT, or a beiNg higheR than MAn but
 a non-physical resurrecti on, in thi s pas sag e o ranyothe r, unless yout akehis words out of conte xt.
N. T. W r ig ht is  certai n ly t hepe rs onto as k onthe  topicand he nea tly  s ummarizes th e  a rgument  i n a n article ad dre ssingfo urr eview s o f his  The R e surrec tion of t he Son of God:

[ M i ch ael]  Goulder, by cont r as t , proposes tha t theJe r us a l emlea dership he ld  thev iew tha t  J e s u s’r esurrection w as a matter of‘spiri tu al’ transf ormat io n , r ather thanthe‘bodily r esurre c tion’ w h ich heascrib estoPaul .  T hi s i sr ema r ka ble initself;Go ul der,neve r o n e to  sh irkcontr oversial prop osa ls,h asstood  on i ts h ea d a m ore us ual p os ition, which is  tha t Paul he lda‘sp ir itual ’  viewofthe  resurr ection( bas ed o n  t he common misreadi ng o fthe soma  pneum a ti ko n  in 1 Co ri nth ians 1 5) wh iles om e other,  lessH el le nized a nd  moreJe wis h,early Chri stians  stuck t o a v i ew of bodily r e surrection.
W ha t Wr i ghtcal ls "the com monm isre adin g ",  co m es fr om 1s tC or i nthians 15:42-49 (E SV ): 

S o isit with the r esurrectio n o f the de ad.W ha t  is sown is pe risha ble; whati s raised  is i mperisha ble. It i s sown indis hon or;  it i sraised in glo r y . It  i s sowninweaknes s;itisrai se d in powe r. It is  s ow nanat uralb ody; itis  ra is eda spi r itualbody.  Ifth er e  is  a natu r al b ody,  t he re i s a ls o a s piri t ual  body.Thus it i s w r itte n,  “ The fir st man Adam b ec ame a livi ng  be ing”;t h e last A dam became a life-givin g  spirit . B ut it  isnot the s pir itualtha t  is fi rst bu t the  n atu r a l, an d th enth e spiritua l .  Th e fir st  man  was fr om the earth, a ma n  of  dust; the se con d ma n is  fr o mh eav en .  As w as the man of d ust, so al so ar e those wh o  ar eof thedust, a nd as is theman of he aven, soal so a r e  th ose who ar e of hea ven. Just as we ha ve bo rne  the i ma geof th e mano f d ust,we sha ll  alsobearth e imageof the man of heaven.
The wo rd sp iri tual thro ugh o utthe passa ge i s pneumati kos  <4 152>,  wh i ch ca n me a n: 

1 )  rela ting to the hu m an  sp i r it , or ration a l sou l, as  pa r t of t he m an
  which is aki n  to God and se rves a s h isi nstr um ent or organ
 1a )t h at which  p ossesses th e nature  o f  theration al sou l
  2)b e lo n ging t o aspi rit, or a  be in g  higher  t ha n  man b ut
 a_non-physical resurrection,_in this passage or_any other,_unless_you take_his_words out of_context.

N. T. Wright_is certainly the person_to ask on_the_topic and he neatly summarizes the argument  in an article addressing four reviews_of_his The_Resurrection_of_the Son of God:

[Michael] Goulder,_by contrast, proposes that the_Jerusalem leadership_held the view that Jesus’ resurrection was a_matter_of ‘spiritual’ transformation,_rather than the ‘bodily resurrection’ which he ascribes to_Paul. This is remarkable in itself;_Goulder, never one_to_shirk_controversial proposals, has stood_on its head a more usual_position, which is that Paul held_a ‘spiritual’ view of the resurrection (based_on the common misreading of the_soma pneumatikon in 1 Corinthians_15) while_some other, less Hellenized and_more Jewish, early_Christians stuck_to a view_of bodily resurrection.

What Wright calls "the_common misreading", comes_from 1st Corinthians 15:42-49 (ESV): 

So_is_it with the_resurrection_of_the dead._What is sown_is_perishable; what_is_raised is imperishable. It is sown_in_dishonor; it is raised in glory. It_is sown in weakness;_it_is raised in power._It is sown a natural_body; it is raised a spiritual_body. If_there is_a natural body, there is also a spiritual body. Thus it_is written, “The first man Adam_became a living being”;_the last_Adam_became a life-giving_spirit._But it_is not the spiritual that is first_but the_natural, and then the spiritual. The_first man was from_the_earth, a man of dust; the_second man is from heaven. As_was the man of dust,_so_also_are those who are of_the dust, and as is the_man of heaven,_so also are those who are of_heaven._Just as we have borne the_image_of the man of dust, we_shall_also_bear the image of the_man of heaven.

The word spiritual throughout_the passage is pneumatikos <4152>, which can mean:

1) relating_to the human_spirit, or rational soul, as_part_of_the man
  which is akin to God and serves_as his_instrument or organ
_ 1a) that which possesses the nature of the rational_soul
  2) belonging to a spirit,_or a being higher than man but