Rev. 22:19 Tree or Trees.

[victor.vicveh]

So the greek goes like this:

τοῦ ξύλου τῆς ζωῆς (Rev. 22:19 NA28)

could it be possible to translate τοῦ ξύλου (Genitive, plural) as Trees?

I did a research, and according to some resources this could be treated as a collective noun.

Thanks for your answers.

[Barry Hofstetter]

Well, just to clarify, the form is genitive singular. So as it stands, no, it's not possible.

What research did you do? According to NA 28, there is no textual variant worth mentioning (there is Erasmus' famous "book" error, retroverting from the Latin, but that's hardly the same thing).

[nathaniel j. erickson]

ξύλον can occasionally have a collective sense when it is used to refer to wood in the sense of "lumber, building material." Habakkuk 2.11 seems to have this idea:

διότι λίθος ἐκ τοίχου βοήσεται, καὶ κάνθαρος ἐκ ξύλου φθέγξεται αὐτά ("For the stone shall cry out of the wall, and the beetle out of the timber shall cry out" Sir Lancelot Brenton's translation).

However, these references are clearly not to a tree, but to wood used in building.

Even for this use the plural is used as well, and seems to predominate (at least in the Septuagint and New Testament). This would be represented by a passage like Gen 6.14

ποίησον οὖν σεαυτῷ κιβωτὸν ἐκ ξύλων τετραγώνων ("make therefore for yourself an ark from square-cut WOOD/TIMBER").

In the New Testament, there is no instance where ξύλον is used as a singular with reference to anything other than a tree or cross (excepting Revelation 18.12 refers to wood as a trading good; Acts 16.24 refers to the stocks that prisoners' feet go in, which is not relevant to the initial question).

I looked at the following lexicons to see if anyone has any readings where ξύλον as a singular refers to a plurality of trees, and found no support for that:
LSJ, Pape (German lexicon), Muraoka's Septuagint lexicon, and the ΜΕΓΑ ΛΕΞΙΚΟΝ ΟΛΗΣ ΤΗΣ ΕΛΛΗΝΙΚΗΣ ΓΛΩΣΣΗΣ.

Barring some convincing instances otherwise, the proposed translation is not possible, as Barry has already noted.

[Barry Hofstetter]

ξύλον can occasionally have a collective sense when it is used to refer to wood in the sense of "lumber, building material." Habakkuk 2.11 seems to have this idea:

διότι λίθος ἐκ τοίχου βοήσεται, καὶ κάνθαρος ἐκ ξύλου φθέγξεται αὐτά ("For the stone shall cry out of the wall, and the beetle out of the timber shall cry out" Sir Lancelot Brenton's translation).

However, these references are clearly not to a tree, but to wood used in building.

Even for this use the plural is used as well, and seems to predominate (at least in the Septuagint and New Testament). This would be represented by a passage like Gen 6.14

ποίησον οὖν σεαυτῷ κιβωτὸν ἐκ ξύλων τετραγώνων ("make therefore for yourself an ark from square-cut WOOD/TIMBER").

In the New Testament, there is no instance where ξύλον is used as a singular with reference to anything other than a tree or cross (excepting Revelation 18.12 refers to wood as a trading good; Acts 16.24 refers to the stocks that prisoners' feet go in, which is not relevant to the initial question).

I looked at the following lexicons to see if anyone has any readings where ξύλον as a singular refers to a plurality of trees, and found no support for that:
LSJ, Pape (German lexicon), Muraoka's Septuagint lexicon, and the ΜΕΓΑ ΛΕΞΙΚΟΝ ΟΛΗΣ ΤΗΣ ΕΛΛΗΝΙΚΗΣ ΓΛΩΣΣΗΣ.

Barring some convincing instances otherwise, the proposed translation is not possible, as Barry has already noted.

BrillDAG shows the range of usage in broader Greek literature. My favorite is the chicken roost!

ξύλον -ου, τό [cf. Got. sauls, Lithu. šùlas] ⓐ wood, timber, lumber IL. 23.327 SOPH. Tr. 700; usu. pl. IL. 8.547, al. OD. 15.322, al. EUR. Cycl. 242 ARISTOPH. Ve. 301; καὶ ξύλον ἦεν it was nothing but a piece of wood for building AP 16.187.1 | pl. timber, logs, for building HDT. 1.186.3 ARR. EpictD. 1.15.2; νήια ξύλα timber for ship-building HES. Op. 808 = ναυπηγήσιμα ξ. THUC. 7.25.2 XEN. An. 6.4.4 PLAT. Leg. 706b DEMOSTH. 17.28 etc. ‖ fig. of an insensitive man: ὁ δὲ σίδηρός τις ἢ ξύλον ἤ τι τῶν ἀναισθήτων ἦν ἄρα πρὸς τὰς δεήσεις τὰς ἐμάς but he was iron, wood, or some other unfeeling material when faced with my entreaties ACH. 5.22.5 (codd.) ⓑ tree XEN. An. 6.4.5 | live tree wood EUR. Cycl. 572 THPHR. H.P. 3.9.7 etc. | cotton tree PLIN. 19.2 (14); εἴρια ἀπὸ ξύλου cotton (lit. tree wool) HDT. 3.47.2, cf. POLL. 7.75 εἵματα ἀπὸ ξύλων πεποιημένα cotton clothes HDT. 7.65 ⓒ wooden object, hence stick, cane, cudgel HP. Art. 55, al. HDT. 4.180.2 ARISTOPH. Pax 1121, al. ALCIPHR. 3.30.5 etc. ‖ bench, table, of a banker DEMOSTH. 45.33 POLL. 3.84; of a judge ARISTOPH. Ve. 90; bench (of Hippokrates) HP. Art. 72 ‖ seat, reserved place (for magistrates) ARISTOPH. Ach. 25 HSCH. ‖ roost, that chickens sleep on ARISTOPH. Nub. 1431 ‖ pillory, for trapping the neck ARISTOPH. Nub. 592, Lys. 680; for neck, hands and feet: πεντεσύριγγον ξύλον five-holed wooden frame ARISTOPH. Eq. 1049 | for feet stocks LYS. 10.16 NT Acts 16:24; οἱ δὲ τοὺς πόδας ἐν τῷ ξύλῳ δεδεμένοι the ones who had their feet held tightly in the stocks PLUT. Gen. Socr. 598b | pole, post HDT. 6.75.2, al. ARISTOPH. Eq. 367, al. | cross NT Acts 5:30, al. ‖ as measure of length perch (= three and a half cubits) [HERO] Geom. 23.11.1 P OXY. 2240.29 (IIICE).

[victor.vicveh]

I appreciate your objective answers to my question, thank you in advance.

Well, just to clarify, the form is genitive singular. So as it stands, no, it's not possible.

I meant plural in the semantic sense, thanks for the clarification, taking the context in consideration, looking for instance the Living Translation which translates Rev. 22:2 as follows:

Gr: .. "ἐν μέσῳ τῆς πλατείας αὐτῆς καὶ τοῦ ποταμοῦ ἐντεῦθεν καὶ ἐκεῖθεν ξύλον ζωῆς ποιοῦν καρποὺς δώδεκα, κατὰ μῆνα ἕκαστον ἀποδιδοῦν τὸν καρπὸν αὐτοῦ, καὶ τὰ φύλλα τοῦ ξύλου εἰς θεραπείαν τῶν ἐθνῶν." ..

.." coursing down the center of the main street. On each side of the river grew Trees of Life,[a] bearing twelve crops of fruit, with a fresh crop each month; the leaves were used for medicine to heal the nations.".. The Living Bible copyright © 1971 by Tyndale House Foundation.

following on the footnote:
"a) Revelation 22:2 Trees of Life, literally, “The tree of life”—used here as a collective noun, implying plurality."

Isn´t the same tree or trees that the writer is talking about later on 22:19?

Another instance, on this same translation is Palsm 1:3 :
"They are like trees along a riverbank bearing luscious fruit each season without fail."
the greek text is: "καὶ ἔσται ὡς τὸ ξύλον τὸ πεφυτευμένον παρὰ τὰς διεξόδους τῶν ὑδάτων" ..

One last instance is Lev. 26:20 :
"Your strength shall be spent in vain; for your land shall not yield its crops, nor your trees their fruit."
Gr: "καὶ ἔσται εἰς κενὸν ἡ ἰσχὺς ὑμῶν, καὶ οὐ δώσει ἡ γῆ ὑμῶν τὸν σπόρον αὐτῆς, καὶ τὸ ξύλον τοῦ ἀγροῦ ὑμῶν οὐ δώσει τὸν καρπὸν αὐτοῦ."

ξύλον can occasionally have a collective sense when it is used to refer to wood in the sense of "lumber, building material.

These three examples are in the singular morphologically, but can semantically imply a plurality as indicated by the footnote on Rev 22:2?

Notice this last commentary where the writer takes Rev. 2:7 and Rev. 22:2 as .. "the sg. in both cases is collective" .. even though at the end he puts Rev 22:19 as singular. it strikes me out a bit how all these instances are traslated as plural.

-EDNT Dictionary 3627 ξύλον, ου, τό xylon wood*.... "2:7: "give to eat of the tree of life, which is in God's Paradise"; 22:2a: "trees of life on each side of the river bearing fruit twelve times a year" (the construction is ambiguous); 22:2b: "the leaves of the trees are [used] for the healing of the Gentiles"; (the sg. in both cases is collective [contra, e.g., Schmidtke in Erdmann, et al., 23]; see for the subject matter esp. Ezek 47:12; "tree of life" by the water, 1QH 8:5f.; cf. also 4 Esdr 7:123); 22:14: the godly "have the right to the tree of life" (cf. 1 Enoch [​Greek] 25:4); 22:19, in the warning at the end of the book as a threat of punishment: a "share in the tree of life." A play on the cross of Christ is not yet evident in these passages in Revelation (contra, recently, H. Kraft, Rev [HNT] 59)" ..

[Barry Hofstetter]

I meant plural in the semantic sense, thanks for the clarification, taking the context in consideration, looking for instance the Living Translation which translates Rev. 22:2 as follows:

Pretty much everybody agrees that it's a collective in Rev 22. But does that mean that we so translate, or do leave it singular to capture the feel of the original, and also to connect more strongly the imagery from Genesis?