410 THoMAS ToPS II. Pilate’s Truth Question (John 18,38a) We will discuss three possible interpretations of Pilate’s question of truth. We will evaluate not only whether these interpretations are exegetically possible, but also whether these interpretations can provide us with an authentic question of truth. With an authentic question of truth we mean a question of truth that refers us to truth’s very being, namely un-concealment (avlh,qeia), that is, truth as the result of an un- concealing or revelatory process. As the result of the process of the un- concealment of meaning, truth itself is what we have called the result of the revelatory dimension of a text. Consequently, with an authentic question of truth we mean a question that reveals this dimension of the text. As we have said, the reader is not passive in this, but his act of in- terpretation is constitutive for the revelatory process and lets the reader participate in it. As such, an authentic question of truth is a question that invites the reader into this participation. every work of art has this authentic question of truth, because it is the trigger for the actualization of its revelatory potential. yet, certain interpretations of the text can obliterate these triggers, and can therefore also blur the revelatory po- tential of a text. Hence, our second criterion for evaluating interpreta- tions of 18,38a can be called valid. Furthermore, as we have illustrated in the first part of this article, the literary figure of the Johannine Pilate makes this criterion necessary. There is no literary character of the Jo- hannine Pilate without our act of interpretation. Therefore, one of the criteria of this interpretation should be that it does not detach us from this fundamental hermeneutical process that we have identified as the revelatory dimension of a text. An interpretation of the literary charac- ter of Pilate that detaches us from the revelatory dimension of the text is poorer than an interpretation that reveals this dimension to us, and therefore the latter should enjoy our preference. 1. avlh,qeia as an Exclusivistic Concept A. köstenberger observes that “the three references to truth in 18:36-38 constitute an inclusio with the three references to grace and truth in 1:14-17” 47. He concludes from this that the Gospel of John transforms God’s faithfulness to the covenant of the old Testament into the universal message of the Gospel. We will explain this. köstenberger states that there are numerous parallels between John 1,14-17 and 47 köSTeNBeRGeR, “«What is Truth?»”, 45.