WHoSe TRUTH? A ReADeR-oRIeNTeD STUDy 401 narrative gap of 18,33, but the aggressive nature of the words and deeds of Pilate that it henceforth tries to explain is already presupposed by the concept. For example, why does Pilate declare that there is no legal ground for Jesus’ conviction, but then does not release him? Do you really explain anything when you respond that the reason is his aggressive determination to drive the Jews to neglect their religious identity and heritage, or his reluctance to give in to the accusations of the Jews, but also that he is too weak to be able to defy them? What is in need of ex- planation, namely the aggressiveness or reluctance of Pilate’s words or deeds, is already presupposed in the concepts these interpreters use to make sense of these acts and deeds. This fallacy of interpretation seems to be inevitable. As a consequence, the way in which an interpreter char- acterizes Pilate says more about the interpreter than about Pilate. 2. John 18,39 – 19,6 We offer a further illustration of the importance of the concepts the interpreter uses in his/her act of interpreting Pilate’s acts and deeds. The first interrogation of Jesus (18,33-38a) results in Pilate’s first at- tempt to release Jesus (18,38b). As we discussed earlier, Tuckett con- siders Pilate to be not really convinced of Jesus’ innocence. If Pilate really was convinced of this, he would have released Jesus. yet, al- though he does not find any legal ground to convict Jesus, he does not release him either. In the eyes of Tuckett, Pilate manifests himself here as dishonest, corrupt, and evil. According to Tuckett, it naturally fol- lows from this that the sequence in the narrative tells us that Pilate wants to continue his mockery of the Jews. In 18,39 Pilate knows full well that Jesus’ kingship is not accepted by the Jews, and that is why the Jews’ choice for Barabbas is inevitable 17. Piper remarks correctly that this can be read as a strategy to trap the Jews. If the Jews accept that Jesus is convicted as the king of the Jews, they demonstrate that they are unable to keep control over nationalist messianic movements, and therefore Roman involvement is justified. The Jews express this fear in 11,48. This strategy is even more successful because of the Jews’ choice of Barabbas. Because of this open association with an enemy of the empire, Roman involvement is even more justified 18. H.k. Bond justifies this view by pointing out that, if we take Pilate’s proposal in 18,39 seriously, John portrays him as “completely miscalculating 17 TUCkeTT, “Pilate”, 136. 18 PIPeR, “Characterisation”, 148.