[Rogers M]

In Mark 4.4 are the two infinitives diespasthai , suntetriphthai to be taken as infinitives of result ( the result of him being bound)?
Also, of what kind is the the one they preceed (dedesthai) ?
Rogers

[Josiah Helsel]

Rogers,

As far as I can make out, dedesqai and the other two infinitives are all part of a triple result clause, which is based on the statements of verse 3. Because the man has a demon and cannot be bound (v. 3), all three consequences/results follow: (1) People tried to bind him (because he had a demon), but (2) He burst the chains, and (3) broke the fetters (again, because of the demon). So all three follow as results of verse 3. This seems to be what Max and Mary have to say about it, and it seems to work.

Josiah

[TheIndubitableHoyt]

Speaking of infinitives...
It seemed that Mark used a lot more infinitives in this chapter and a lot fewer participles (e.g., would use a 'to' with an infinitive rather than with a participle as in chapter 1). Do you think this is just linguistic, or does it reflect something about parable vs. narrative?

BEH

[TheIndubitableHoyt]

Speaking of infinitives...
It seemed that Mark used a lot more infinitives in this chapter and a lot fewer participles (e.g., would use a 'to' with an infinitive rather than with a participle as in chapter 1). Do you think this is just linguistic, or does it reflect something about parable vs. narrative?

BEH