412 THoMAS ToPS reader can opt for it, or lose his/her sense for truth entirely. Pilate ex- emplifies this. köstenberger cites Bultmann to conclude that in 18,38a Pilate “shuts the door on the claim of the revelation, and in so doing he shows that he is not of the truth — he is of the lie” 55. In kösten- berger’s view, it is very simple. As Christians, we need to give an “irrefutable answer to Pilate’s question, ‘What is truth?’”, namely by bearing witness in word and deed to “the truth, the gospel, which is found only in Jesus” 56. We do not need to explain that such an interpretation of 18,38a is not able to make the reader aware of his/her activity of interpretation. The reader is confronted with a choice, namely to opt for Jesus or to become insensitive to truth in general. This in no way makes the reader aware that truth or un-concealment (avlh,qeia) is not possible without interpretation. köstenberger’s interpretation of 18,38a rather conceals this for the reader. This interpretation of 18,38a denies the reader access to the revelatory dimension of the text, and leaves him/her with a ter- rifying non-choice: to take revelation for what it is, or to be damned. 2. avlh,qeia as an Inclusivistic Concept To conceive the meaning of Pilate’s question of truth (18,38a) kowalski observes that a double understanding of kingship and truth is present in John: “Während Jesus von königtum und Wahrheit als Bestandteile der offenbarung Gottes spricht, hat Pilatus ein irdisch- reelles Verständnis vom königtum und von der Wahrheit” 57. kowalski illustrates this double understanding of kingship and truth in 18,36-38. In 18,36 the Johannine concept of truth runs parallel with Jesus’ un- derstanding of basilei,a: both are not from this world. While in 18,37 avlh,qeia and ko,smoj clearly exclude each other, this is not the case for Pilate in 18,38a. That is why kowalski concludes that Pilate’s question of truth in 18,38a is “eng verbunden mit Jesu Vorstellung vom König- tum” 58. For Pilate avlh,qeia is parallel to basileu,j, because both are not opposed to κόσμος, while for Jesus avlh,qeia is parallel to basileu,j, be- cause both are opposed to ko,smoj. From this, kowalski concludes that 18,38a is a Johannine misunderstanding in which the truth of power is confronted with the power of truth. kowalski associates the power of 55 köSTeNBeRGeR, “«What is Truth?»”, 52. 56 köSTeNBeRGeR, “«What is Truth?»”, 62. 57 koWAlSkI, “«Was ist Wahrheit?»”, 217. 58 koWAlSkI, “«Was ist Wahrheit?»”, 217.