The Bible contains 'spiritual truth', says this school. This sometimes means 'intellectually acceptable truth'. It's impossible to summarize Bultmann or neo-orthodoxy in general in a paragraph, but one may reasonably state that the typical view is that 'Christian myth', that is, the stories in the Bible, must be 'demythologized' in order to get at the 'core truths'. In this way, 'truth' has become spiritualized and no longer means historical or literal truth, which, to the neoorthodox, is not at all important. I don't consider this use of the word 'truth' to be what Jesus meant when He used it, even though he was applying it to Himself as a Person.
Truth is physically true as well as psychologically or spiritually true.
It cannot be fragmented. With this background, 'spiritual truth' can only relate to intellectually acceptable truth, whether it be a removal of the supernatural from a story in the Bible, or an intellectually framed statement of truth about God. All this has a distinctly Gnostic flavour. The exclusion of the supernatural, of miracles, still lies at the root of the beliefs of the demythologizers. Thus, I see the downgrading of the importance of physical miracles as being at the root of the beliefs of those who didn't and don't want to accept such things as creation in six days.