Mark 5:4 has an interesting construction with διά, and provides an example of why we need to watch the larger context when translating. Vv 3–4 are as follows.
“This man lived in the tombs, and no one could bind him anymore, not even with a chain. For he had often been chained hand and foot (διὰ τὸ αὐτὸν πολλάκις πέδαις καὶ ἁλύσεσιν δεδέσθαι), but he tore the chains apart and broke the irons on his feet (καὶ διεσπάσθαι ὑπ᾿ αὐτοῦ τὰς ἁλύσεις καὶ τὰς πέδας συντετρῖφθαι). No one was strong enough to subdue him” (NIV).
Notice that διὰ goes with three accusatives, each with its own infinitive.
- αὐτὸν ... δεδέσθαι
- διεσπάσθαι ... ἁλύσεις
- πέδας συντετρῖφθαι
But this is where the context comes in. Why was he was not able to be bound? In other words, how are you going to translate διά?
The NASB and CSB have “because.” Do you see why that is a poor translation? It says that he could not be bound because he had often been bound, which of course makes no sense. The CSB somewhat fixes this by translating καί as “but”: “but had torn the chains apart.”
Much better to recognize that the reason he could not be bound was because he kept breaking the bonds, and translating διά ... καί as “for ... but,” as does the ESV, NIV, and NRSV. The NLT typically ignores the Greek (losing the explicit connection between result, v 3, and cause, v 4) but gets the sense right. “Whenever he was put into chains and shackles—as he often was—he snapped the chains from his wrists and smashed the shackles.”
So the point is to be careful at looking too closely at a single word and not translating it in context.