"45 Many of the Jews therefore, who had come with Mary and had seen what he did, believed in him, 46 but some of them went to the Pharisees and told them what Jesus had done. 47 So the chief priests and the Pharisees gathered the Council and said, “What are we to do? For this man performs many signs. 48 If we let him go on like this, everyone will believe in him, and the Romans will come and take away both our place and our nation.” 49 But one of them, Caiaphas, who was high priest that year, said to them, “You know nothing at all. 50 Nor do you understand that it is better for you that one man should die for the people, not that the whole nation should perish.”51 He did not say this of his own accord, but being high priest that year he prophesied that Jesus would die for the nation, 52 and not for the nation only, but also to gather into one the children of God who are scattered abroad. 53 So from that day on they made plans to put him to death.
54 Jesus therefore no longer walked openly among the Jews, but went from there to the region near the wilderness, to a town called Ephraim, and there he stayed with the disciples.
55 Now the Passover of the Jews was at hand, and many went up from the country to Jerusalem before the Passover to purify themselves. 56 They were looking for Jesus and saying to one another as they stood in the temple, “What do you think? That he will not come to the feast at all?”57 Now the chief priests and the Pharisees had given orders that if anyone knew where he was, he should let them know, so that they might arrest him."
John 11:45-57
In these verses, which follow the account of the miracle, we see what has now become characteristic in John's record - the fact of division, with some believing, and others reacting adversely against Jesus. Some, who had come to mourn with Mary, found faith and believed on Him through the miracle, but others reported the miracle to the authorities, with obviously malicious intent (46), to cause a reaction among the Pharisees. In this they succeeded, as we see in 47, 48, which seem to express the genuine fear the Jews had that their place and their nation would become extinct if Rome were provoked to action by the upsurgence of a popular movement following a Messianic figure. We need not doubt that this was a genuine fear on their part, even though it was prompted by all sorts of unworthy motives and passions - did they not hate Jesus because He had challenged their religious authority and supremacy? - For the temple and the land meant everything to them. But in the event, their decision to avoid such consequences by disposing of Jesus itself led to the very misfortunes they were seeking to avoid. There is something very grim about the irony of this situation and there is even more irony to come, as we see in 49, 50. Caiaphas agreed that to allow Jesus to go on in this way would probably lead to the extinction of the Jewish nation; was it therefore not more expedient that Jesus Himself should die than that all the people should suffer. Thus, words spoken in opposition against Jesus and in an attempt to destroy Him in order to save the Jewish temple and nation, actually turned out to have been true prophecy. Did Caiaphas know what he was saying? Was he echoing contemptuously some 'substitutionary' saying of Jesus, which seemed to claim that He would die for the people, one of the 'ransom' sayings, for example - 'The Son of man came not to be ministered unto but to minister, and to give His life a ransom for many'. Were Caiaphas' words a blasphemous mockery, as if to say, 'Let us fulfil His own words for Him', not realising that this in fact was what was going to happen (cf Acts 2:23)? John's comment in 51, 52 serves to confirm such an interpretation.