Talk:what hath God wrought

what hath God wrought
If indeed this is idiomatic, I really doubt that the current definition is adequate. As a rhetorical question, it doesn't particularly stand out, but I suppose its use is somewhat non-literal. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 04:03, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
 * This is best known as the first message chose to send over a long-distance telegraph line (see ), with its biblical source being much less known. I wonder if there's some kind of sense that comes from this. Chuck Entz (talk) 04:16, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep . It is still productive, which is unusual given its archaic wording ("hath" and "wrought"). bd2412 T 04:23, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
 * I have added three citations to the entry showing idiomatic use (particularly the third one, which is a 2011 publication, showing currency of the archaic phrase); note that none of these citations is from the two most obvious sources, those being the biblical passage and the first telegraph message. In other words, this is a set phrase that is used entirely outside of its historical context to convey meaning not immediately apparent from the phrase itself. As noted below, I have also adjusted the definition, per Μετάknowledge. bd2412 T 16:04, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep as redefined and cited. DCDuring TALK 16:53, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Looks like a keeper as currently defined. Mglovesfun (talk) 17:06, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep as redefined and cited. --Dmol (talk) 20:38, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

Kept. &#x200b;—msh210℠ (talk) 18:16, 5 December 2013 (UTC)