WHoSe TRUTH? A ReADeR-oRIeNTeD STUDy 405 heritage, although this did not happen in the Johannine narrative 34. In this view, Pilate’s mockery forces only the Jews’ rejection of Jesus as their king, and not their recognition of the sovereignty of Caesar, and therefore the denial of yHWH as being the only sovereign power. yet, against the background of 19,12, the Jews’ acceptance of Caesar’s sov- ereignty in 19,15f. is understandable, because otherwise they could also be liable to the same accusation as they uttered against Pilate in 19,12, namely that everyone who recognizes any other king but Caesar is against Caesar. Therefore, the Jews’ acceptance of Caesar’s sover- eignty in 19,15f. can be interpreted as a form of self-defense. But, of course, this form of self-defense already implies that Pilate is aggres- sive, and thus that it is Pilate’s mockery that lies at the basis of the Jews’ repudiation of their own religious heritage. Again, one cannot compare apples with oranges. The different con- cepts the interpreters use to build up the narrative results in completely different and incomparable story worlds. you can say that there are many Gospels, but you can also say that there are many versions of the story world of the Gospel of John. There is no Pilate unless we help to construct him, and this can be done in multiple ways, i.e., by using the concept of aggressiveness or the concept of reluctance. That is why we think Pilate’s question about truth catches the eye of the reader: ti, evstin avlh,qeiaÈ (18,38a). When we read it, we are made aware of our own act of interpretation, and we become aware of our own input and activity in constructing the narrative and characterizing Pilate. Nevertheless, when caught up in the wild and lively action of interpretation, such an overtone is not always heard. We will illustrate this. 4. John 18,38a It needs little clarification that against the background of Tuckett’s characterization of Pilate as aggressive, 18,38a is a “dismissive mock- ing question”. For Tuckett it is possible from the point of view of the story world that Pilate only pretends to consider Jesus’ kingship as a threat. What is important for Pilate is not truth, but the political advan- tages he receives from it. As such, he does not take Jesus’ kingship se- riously for the reason that Jesus bears witness to the truth (18,37). Rather, he pretends to take Jesus’ kingship seriously, so that he can drive the Jews into recognizing the sovereignty of the Roman emperor. The actual truth claim behind Jesus’ kingship is of no importance to 34 PIPeR, “Characterisation”, 152.