No. An appositional phrase is a relative clause in which "who/that is" is omitted, and in nonrestrictive clauses it is set off by a comma, including at the end of a sentence. That is the rule. It is not circular logic. You, however, change the relative to a personal pronoun, and even include an example where you make a singular refer back to a plural, which violates the rules of Greek grammar.Worthless circularity again.
And I proved above that the English text of the AV is far more natural without an apposition claim.
The whole "ellipses" thing is weird. Where on earth did you get that from? An apposition is not considered an elliptical phrase. Elliptical clauses are a different function of the English language. Quite simply, we don't want to see "whose . . . whom . . . who is . . . who is . . . who is" in English. That's why these constructions exist.
"God blessed" is also nonrestrictive, and set off by a comma. It gives additional information of the subject that does not affect the point of the sentence. Otherwise, you're looking at, "and from whom Christ came God blessed forever." So now He came to us blessed by God? This is also why you had to introduce words in your explanation after you removed "who is over all."
Are you even applying critical thought to what you're saying?