Amos 4:6-11, King James Version
Italic words were supplied in the English translation for clarity.
Amos 4:6-11
Repeated Calamities Did Not Produce Return
Cleanness of teeth, and no return
Five movements interpret communal disasters as warnings: hunger (cleanness of teeth means lack of food, not hygiene), selective drought, blight and palmerworm, pestilence and sword, and an overthrow like Sodom and Gomorrah. Each ends, "yet have ye not returned unto me."
The refrain addresses Israel corporately. It is a patterned accusation of nonresponse, not a diagnosis of every hungry child, droughted field, or soldier. The list uses covenant-warning vocabulary and may gather more than one remembered crisis. No event here is a secure match for a modern famine, epidemic, or war.
A brand plucked from burning is still not return
Some are left like a firebrand snatched from the blaze, yet the community still does not turn. Narrow survival is not the same as repentance. The Sodom comparison is catastrophe language. It does not license abuse of a city or of LGBTQ people.
Jesus and Job resist simplistic equations between personal suffering and personal guilt. Amos's corporate rhetoric must not become disaster victim-blaming. The LORD seeks return; later readers are not given exhaustive access to providence.
How this should shape us
After disaster, meet urgent needs first and investigate preventable causes. Examine institutional patterns without assigning guilt to casualties. Do not let a preacher announce God's reason for a weather event, and do not use Sodom as a weapon against a population.
Teach it back
Explain Amos 4:6-11 in your own words. Include its place in Amos's judgment-restoration movement, one material uncertainty, and one use the context rules out.
Your explanation stays in this browser. It is not sent or saved.
Go deeper
The explanation above is meant to stand on its own. Open these notes only if you want language, history, disagreements, or source locations.
Where careful interpreters disagreeThe strongest options and their difficulties
Where do careful interpreters disagree?
Best judgment: Interpreters differ over historical referents, chronology, covenant-formula dependence, and whether the events are natural, military, or rhetorically stylized; the repeated failed return controls the unit.
How certain? probableResearch trail and exact locationsThe source record behind this section
Supports: Exact reader-facing Scripture wording, paragraph markers, supplied-word markup, and complete verse coverage.
Amos 4:6-11, pinned eng-kjv2006 USFM corpus
Supports: Masoretic Hebrew wording, morphology, clause relationships, wordplays, names, and the base text behind translation discussion.
Open Scriptures MorphHB v.2.2, commit 6a5db284c715c18b239422e57bb89684e6a19f00, wlc/Amos.xml, 4:6-11
Supports: Verse-level translation, syntax, textual, literary, historical, and uncertainty notes.
NET Bible Amos PDF, printed pp. 1712-1713, translation and notes on 4:6-11
Supports: Whole-book movement, eighth-century horizon, literary boundaries, composition, and verse-level alternatives.
Dines, 'Amos,' Oxford Bible Commentary, printed pp. 585, discussion of 4:6-11
Sources for This Section
These records identify the source, the claim it supports, and the exact location used. A source remains evidence to evaluate; it does not replace the biblical text.
Biblical text
King James (Authorized) Version — eng-kjv2006
eBible.org and CrossWire Bible Society
USFM archive eng-kjv2006_usfm.zip; source files dated 2026-08-19; downloaded 2026-08-24; archive SHA-256 aec1b3b26c622fd3d963d2bbac963016b9513246ffbfa20da00bb100372ea007; normalized corpus SHA-256 09aef51d90488aa7b9722b3fd9a93f4b25f6bf2064c5fd798fb39673c300ddf2.
Supports: Exact reader-facing Scripture wording, paragraph markers, supplied-word markup, and complete verse coverage.
Exact location: Amos 4:6-11, pinned eng-kjv2006 USFM corpus
Open source ↗hebrew text and morphology
Open Scriptures Hebrew Bible: Amos
Open Scriptures
Open Scriptures, release 2.2
Supports: Masoretic Hebrew wording, morphology, clause relationships, wordplays, names, and the base text behind translation discussion.
Exact location: Open Scriptures MorphHB v.2.2, commit 6a5db284c715c18b239422e57bb89684e6a19f00, wlc/Amos.xml, 4:6-11
Open source ↗translation and translator notes
NET Bible: Amos with translators' notes
Biblical Studies Press
Biblical Studies Press, 2006
Supports: Verse-level translation, syntax, textual, literary, historical, and uncertainty notes.
Exact location: NET Bible Amos PDF, printed pp. 1712-1713, translation and notes on 4:6-11
Open source ↗modern critical commentary
Amos
Jennifer M. Dines
Oxford University Press, in The Oxford Bible Commentary, 2001
Supports: Whole-book movement, eighth-century horizon, literary boundaries, composition, and verse-level alternatives.
Exact location: Dines, 'Amos,' Oxford Bible Commentary, printed pp. 585, discussion of 4:6-11
Open source ↗