The key phrase you are asking about is ἀρνήσασθαι ἑαυτὸν οὐ δύναται, translated by the ESV and most other versions as he cannot deny himself.

The phrase being translated here as cannot is οὐ δύναται - ou dynatai. The word οὐ indicates negation. The word δύναται is the present tense of δύναμαι (dynamai), but the voice here could be interpreted as either "middle" or "active". The lexicons assign δύναμαι a meaning of "can", "be able to", "be capable of", "can do", "able to do", "be able", etc.

The voice of the verb may be relevant here. While the active voice indicates that the subject has the function of the actor and the passive voice indicates that the subject is the recipient of the action denoted by the verb, the middle voice - which we don't really have in English - indicates that the subject is both the actor as well as the recipient of the action. The Glossary of Linguistic Terms defines the middle voice:

Middle voice is a voice that indicates that the subject is the actor and acts:

• upon himself or herself reflexively

• for his or her own benefit.

In the case of plural subjects, the actors may, perhaps, act upon each other.

I don't know that the issue of verb voice is completely relevant here, but if δύναται is understood to be in the middle voice, the phrase could perhaps be understood as God enabling or not enabling Himself to do something.

The key phrase you are asking about is ἀρνήσασθαι ἑαυτὸν οὐ δύναται, translated by the ESV and most other versions as he cannot deny himself.

The phrase being translated here as cannot is οὐ δύναται - ou dynatai. The word οὐ indicates negation. The word δύναται is the present tense of δύναμαι (dynamai), but the voice here could be interpreted as either "middle" or "active". The lexicons assign δύναμαι a meaning of "can", "be able to", "be capable of", "can do", "able to do", "be able", etc.

The voice of the verb may be relevant here. While the active voice indicates that the subject has the function of the actor and the passive voice indicates that the subject is the recipient of the action denoted by the verb, the middle voice - which we don't really have in English - indicates that the subject is both the actor as well as the recipient of the action. The Glossary of Linguistic Terms defines the middle voice:

Middle voice is a voice that indicates that the subject is the actor and acts:

• upon himself or herself reflexively

• for his or her own benefit.

In the case of plural subjects, the actors may, perhaps, act upon each other.

Strictly speaking, δύναμαι is referred to as a so-called "deponent" verb that lacks any active voice forms. Sometimes it is explained that deponent verbs have no true middle voice and represent the active voice by what normally would have been the middle voice form. I don't believe that this is exactly correct. One explanation of deponency, specifically as it relates to δύναμαι, reads:

The term and concept of “deponency” is confusing and misleading. Verbs such as ἔρχομαι and  ποκρίνομαι and δύναμαι ought not to be considered in any way irregular or wanting because they have no “active-voice” forms. The Greek-speaker understands these verbs as involved in a kind of relationship to the grammatical subject that properly finds expression in the “middle-passive” morphoparadigm. It may be difficult for non- Greek-speakers to grasp the distinctive notion implicit in these “middle-passive” forms, but one should make the effort to discern their flexibility for expression of notions of entering into a state or condition or action, whether involuntarily or voluntarily, and for notions of undergoing a process or action or being subjected to an action. One ought not to suppose that these verbs, because they may be translated into English by “active-voice” verb-forms, are in any way irregular or accidentally given forms that are not appropriate to them.

In the middle voice sense, one might think of δύναται being understood as God enabling or not enabling Himself to do something.

The key phrase you are asking about is ἀρνήσασθαι ἑαυτὸν οὐ δύναται, translated by the ESV and most other versions as he cannot deny himself.

The phrase being translated here as cannot is οὐ δύναται - ou dynatai. The word οὐ indicates negation. The word δύναται is the present tense of δύναμαι (dynamai), but the voice here could be interpreted as either "middle" or "active". The lexicons assign δύναμαι a meaning of "can", "be able to", "be capable of", "can do", "able to do", "be able", etc.

The voice of the verb may be relevant here. While the active voice indicates that the subject has the function of the actor and the passive voice indicates that the subject is the recipient of the action denoted by the verb, the middle voice - which we don't really have in English - indicates that the subject is both the actor as well as the recipient of the action. The Glossary of Linguistic Terms defines the middle voice:

Middle voice is a voice that indicates that the subject is the actor and acts:

• upon himself or herself reflexively

• for his or her own benefit.

In the case of plural subjects, the actors may, perhaps, act upon each other.

I don't know that the issue of verb voice is completely relevant here, but if δύναται is understood to be in the middle voice, the phrase could be understood as God enabling or not enabling Himself to do something.

The key phrase you are asking about is ἀρνήσασθαι ἑαυτὸν οὐ δύναται, translated by the ESV and most other versions as he cannot deny himself.

The phrase being translated here as cannot is οὐ δύναται - ou dynatai. The word οὐ indicates negation. The word δύναται is the present tense of δύναμαι (dynamai), but the voice here could be interpreted as either "middle" or "active". The lexicons assign δύναμαι a meaning of "can", "be able to", "be capable of", "can do", "able to do", "be able", etc.

The voice of the verb may be relevant here. While the active voice indicates that the subject has the function of the actor and the passive voice indicates that the subject is the recipient of the action denoted by the verb, the middle voice - which we don't really have in English - indicates that the subject is both the actor as well as the recipient of the action. The Glossary of Linguistic Terms defines the middle voice:

Middle voice is a voice that indicates that the subject is the actor and acts:

• upon himself or herself reflexively

• for his or her own benefit.

In the case of plural subjects, the actors may, perhaps, act upon each other.

I don't know that the issue of verb voice is completely relevant here, but if δύναται is understood to be in the middle voice, the phrase could perhaps be understood as God enabling or not enabling Himself to do something.