400 THoMAS ToPS to release Jesus, and as such he is “dishonest, corrupt and evil” 12. Tuck- ett argues that, although Pilate finds no legal grounds (ouvdemi,an aivti,an) to convict Jesus, that is not enough for him to consider Jesus as non- dangerous. Pilate remains conscious of the potential danger of Jesus. This is not so far-fetched. As R. Bieringer observes correctly, Pilate re- mains closed to the religious dimension of Jesus’ kingship. yet, this does not prevent us from imagining that Pilate considers Jesus’ king- ship as a threat to his position because of the possible consequences that it could have for the worldly political powers 13. Jesus’ behavior had a big impact on the Jewish world, and, as such, it had implications for the world that Pilate had in common with the Jews 14. It is not until 19,12 that this potential danger for Pilate actualizes itself. It is in 19,12 that the Jews start to question Pilate’s loyalty to the Roman emperor, and therefore Jesus’ kingship becomes harmful for Pilate. Is then de Boer’s position that Pilate does not consider Jesus as a threat to him false? No, not necessarily. De Boer’s viewpoint on Pilate’s deeds and words is only determined by another conceptual framework. De Boer characterizes Pilate as reluctant, and he treats the narrative gap in 18,33 in a different manner. This framework makes a total view of the deeds and words of Pilate possible, but it is not falsified in any way. De Boer considers Pilate as “an extremely reluctant participant in the drama of Jesus’ trial and crucifixion” 15. Where Tuckett interprets the same deeds and words of Pilate with the concept of aggressiveness, de Boer uses the concept of reluctance. Pilate is convinced of Jesus’ innocence and sincerely wants to release Jesus, but the Jews hinder this and force Pilate in 19,12 to sentence Jesus to his death on the cross 16. The characterization of Pilate starts within the eye of the beholder. There is no neutral stance in this regard. The interpreter is necessarily prejudiced. Furthermore, it is not a logical procedure that lies at the basis of this act of interpretation. The procedure consists in circular rea- soning. The concept of reluctance or aggressiveness is used to fill in the 12 TUCkeTT, “Pilate”, 136. 13 BIeRINGeR, “My kingship”, 165, 171. 14 De BoeR, “Narrative Function”, 142, correctly states that the view that Pi- late belongs to this world is “an assumption rather than a matter of demonstration”. We agree with de Boer that 19,15 otherwise makes no sense. PIPeR (“Characteri- sation”, 130) gives another good argument for the statement that Pilate and the Jews share the same world, namely that there is an overlap between “the Jews” and “the world” in John’s vocabulary. 15 De BoeR, “Narrative Function”, 142. 16 De BoeR, “Narrative Function”, 142-145.