Whose Truth? A Reader-Oriented Study of the Johannine Pilate and John 18,38a The goal of this article is to illustrate the important role of the reader in literary criticism. We will do this by showing how the act of interpretation is necessary for the filling of gaps in the narrative line and in the characterization of important literary figures. We will focus primarily on character studies in the Fourth Gospel, and more specifi- cally on the characterization of Pilate. The goal of this study is to show how different interpreters characterize Pilate, and what remains unsaid. This article is more deconstructive in its approach, because it tries to illustrate that no characterization of Pilate reaches the core of this lit- erary figure, but that the act of interpretation is necessary if we are to be able to speak about the literary figure of Pilate. There is no Pilate in the Fourth Gospel outside of our act of interpretation. Consequently, every interpretation of Pilate is our interpretation (cf. Heidegger’s no- tion of Jemeinigkeit). Perhaps it even says more about us than about Pilate. If this is true, and we will try to illustrate this, Pilate’s question of truth (John 18,38a) can be read as a very interesting remark or ques- tion in the text. In the second part of this article we will offer a reading of John 18,38a that can function as a reader’s guide for a deconstructive reading of the text. I. The Characterization of the Johannine Pilate It is not our intention to give a historical overview here of the char- acterization studies of the Johannine Pilate in the history of interpreta- tion. Rather we would like to make clear which hermeneutical choices are implicit in the main interpretations of Pilate. We have discerned three possible interpretations in secondary literature. The first interpre- tation defends Pilate as an aggressive figure who considers Jesus as guilty and as a threat to his authority. In this interpretation, it is Pilate who is the driving force behind Jesus’ crucifixion. The most eminent defender of this position that we will discuss is C.M. Tuckett. The sec- ond interpretation asserts that Pilate is convinced of Jesus’ innocence and that he is reluctant to sentence him. In this interpretation, the Jews are considered as the driving force behind Jesus’ crucifixion. The most eminent defender of this position that we will discuss is M.C. de Boer. BiBlica 97.2 (2016) 395-420