Because Ananus was still high priest by honor, just as Josephus treats him still, even later, when Caiaphas is replaced by Jonathan. Luke would not be missing anything; Luke would be following Josephus' practice of calling former high priests "high priest" still.Bernard Muller wrote: ↑Thu Oct 22, 2020 3:15 pmto Ben,But Ant., XVIII, II, 2 "This man [Gratus the prefect] deprived Ananus of the high priesthoodJonathan succeeded Caiaphas as High Priest; but he did not succeed Ananus, who is also called High Priest here; the simplest reading is that there are at least two high priests at the same time here. (That is, it can easily be read in the same basic manner of one US Senator succeeding another in office: there is a replacement, one for one, but there are still other Senators out there who did not get replaced. To make the analogy even more perfect, each US State seats exactly two Senators; it happens all the time that one of the two will be replaced while the other retains office.)
How could Ananus be a high priest with Caiaphas at the same time. And that would be missed by "Luke".
"Vitellius also deprived Joseph, who was also called Caiaphas, of the high priesthood, and appointed Jonathan, the son of Ananus the high priest, to succeed him." Both Caiaphas and Ananus are called high priests in this sentence, even though Ananus is actually a former high priest.I did not see anything here about that? Where are these two high priests?Antiquities 18.4.3 §95 mentions two high priests as if they served as such at the same time. And they are the same two high priests.
"In the time of Annas the high priest and Caiaphas." Annas is called a high priest in this sentence, even though Ananus is actually a former high priest.
What exactly are you missing here? This is rather clear. Luke could very well be following the exact same procedure as Josephus in calling somebody a high priest who is actually a former high priest.
No, I wrote "by honor" to clarify matters for you, since you do not seem to be understanding the issue. You are in a loop of some kind, and I am trying to help you out of it.Josephus never wrote that, just that the elder Ananus had sons who became high priests (one at the time).Annas by honor
As I have demonstrated, he can also call an individual a high priest who is no longer, at that point of the narrative, a high priest.As I wrote before "I agree that in Antiquities Josephus, at times, call the ex-high priests still alive and the current high priest: "high priests".