He won't find a single instance where the phrase will bear that meaning. His misunderstanding seems to be the result of the KJV translators closely following the order of the words in the original language.
Note that Brian fully agrees with the AV text.
Romans 9:5
Whose
are the fathers,
and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ
came, who is over all,
God blessed for ever.
Amen.
And it looks like you understand and acknowledge that the actual AV text does point to the interpretation I am giving. Or at least allows it and it looks like the natural interp.
God blessed (is Christ) for ever.
And it definitely does NOT point to the apposition "Christ is God" interpretation given by brianrw. (I do not know if that is your interpretation.) There really are only three major possible interpretations. Apposition, Christ is blessed, and the third I know you understandably reject. As it starts a doxology to God totally independent of a connection to Christ.
(Just as a sidenote, there may be an interpretation that tries to put the blessings to Israel, through the Christ, rather than directly.)
As does Hippolytus even more clearly.
Nobody has tried to actually give an alternate for the Hippolytus section:
How do you read this English “God blessed”?
He who is over all, God blessed, has been born; and having been made man, He is yet God for ever.
This Romans 9:5 construction is fairly unique in the Bible, with an unusual one-time word order θεὸς εὐλογητὸς. Murray Harris comments on this unusual reversed word order and also speaks of the "natural association" of the two words. spin was in the same ballpark when he wrote of both words being nominative and singular and masculine as helping to understand how they are connected. And spin wrote of εὐλογητὸς being nominalized, which, if he is correct, eliminates the interpretation that has it as an adjective describing θεὸς .
Since it is unique in word order there is no surprise that you do not have other spots saying the same thing.
You might be limited by searching in the NT and Greek OT. And I believe spin is well versed on Classical Greek as well as the Bible Greek, and when he talks of a feature of the language he would be drawing on the wider Greek corpus.
btw, John Milton, I do appreciate your efforts on this question. It is refreshing that you are at least considering alternatives and looking for examples. Please do not take my exploratory studies as negative to your efforts.