Not my choice of book. I was asked to read it and comment. Kung covers a vast field of theological thought with tremendous detail and critical examination. Among other things Kung states: "(we) can no longer accept the mythical ideas ... of a being descended from God, existing before time and beyond the world." "Jesus' divine sonship is not dependent on the virgin birth. He is God's Son, not because God instead of man effected his origin, but because he is chosen and destined as God's Son." "Although the virgin birth cannot be understood as a historical-biological event, it can be regarded as a meaningful symbol at least for that time." And on the inspiration of Scripture he says: "It is unequivocally man's word ... hence it is not without shortcomings and mistakes, concealment and confusion, limitations and errors."
Did Kung really know anything of the new birth?He deals with everything but the regenerating work of the Holy Spirit.