The Father Acts on The Son’s Behalf

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

ByGraceThroughFaith

Well-Known Member
Mar 14, 2021
2,870
852
113
Dudley
trinitystudies.org
Faith
Christian
Country
United Kingdom
The Father Acts on The Son’s Behalf

It is argued by those who reject the Bible’s teaching, that Jesus Christ is YHWH, Almighty God, The Great I AM, that God the Father is prominent, and Jesus Christ is secondary. Jesus is said to be “sent” by the Father (John 20:21, ect), and Himself says that He can do nothing without the Father (John 5:19, etc).

There are passages in the New Testament, that are clear, that Jesus Christ is not, as The Eternal God, in any way “inferior” to the Father. One such verse is in 1 Corinthians 1:9:

“πιστὸς ὁ θεὸς, δι' οὗ ἐκλήθητε εἰς κοινωνίαν τοῦ υἱοῦ αὐτοῦ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν”

Literally it reads in English, “ Faithful the God through Whom you were called into fellowship with the Son of Him Jesus Christ the Lord of us”

Here we see that the Greek preposition, “δι' (διά), is used with the genitive, where the meaning clearly is that of “agency”. The Father is acting on the behalf of Jesus Christ, as His “agent”, in calling those into fellowship with Jesus. As it stands, this is impossible, if Jesus Christ is “inferior” to God the Father, or a created Person.

Further, we would here expect Paul to write, “ὑπό οὗ (BY Whom)”, the Father as the “source”, and not “agent”. Three Greek manuscripts, D* F G, actually do read “ὑπό οὗ”, instead of, “δι' οὗ”. No doubt to remove this seemingly difficulty, of the Father acting on the Son’s behalf.

Some English versions, like, ESV, CSB, ISV, NET, KJV, NJKV, Weymouth, etc, translate the Greek “δι' οὗ”, as “by whom”, to make the father the “source”, and not “agent”.

The Greek grammarian, Dr Samuel Greek says of the use of “δι'” here:

“The Father is represented as acting on behalf of his Son, to bring Christians into fellowship with Him” (Handbook to the Grammar of the Greek Testament, p. 246)

And, Dr A T Robertson:

“Through whom (δι' ου). God is the agent (δι') of their call as in Ro 11:36 and also the ground or reason for their call (δι' ον) in Heb 2:10” (A T Robertson)

There is no doubt, that Paul, under the guiding of God the Holy Spirit, wrote “δι' οὗ”, where the meaning clearly is that of AGENCY, and not SOURCE.

How can this be the case here, if, as some teach, that God the Father is the only Person Who is God, and that Jesus Christ is His “agent”, someone secondary, “through Whom”, He Acts? For Paul to have written as he does in 1 Corinthians 1:9, it is clear, that Jesus Christ is God, as much as the Father is God, and in no way “inferior”, as the Jehovah’s Witnesses say in their version, for John 1:1, “and the Word was a god”.

In 2 Thessalonians 2:16, we have another interesting reading:

“αυτος δε ο κυριος ημων ιησους χριστος και ο θεος και πατηρ ημων ο αγαπησας ημας και δους παρακλησιν αιωνιαν και ελπιδα αγαθην εν χαριτι”

Literally, “Himself now the Lord of us Jesus Christ and God the Father of us the One having loved us and having given comfort and eternal hope good by grace”

Note the order of Persons here, where Jesus Christ is placed first, and then God the Father. We have two subjects, Jesus Christ and God the Father, Who are united by the use of the Greek article, “ο (the One)”, which is masculine, singular. Paul here invokes Jesus Christ, and the Father, but places Jesus Christ ahead of the Father, but says that BOTH are the equal SOURCE of our “comfort and eternal hope good by grace”. It should be noted here, that it is clear, that Jesus Christ and the Father are distinct Persons, and not one and the same, as some falsely teach. This is seen in the Greek, “αυτος δε ο κυριος ημων ιησους χριστος και ο θεος και πατηρ ημων”. Impossible to refer to a single Person.

In 1 Thessalonians 3:11, the word order is different:

“αυτος δε ο θεος και πατηρ ημων και ο κυριος ημων ιησους χριστος κατευθυναι την οδον ημων προς υμας”

Literally, “Himself now the God and Father of us and the Lord of us Jesus Christ may direct the way of us to you”

Here we have again the two Persons, the Father and Jesus Christ, where the Father is placed first. Again, it is clear that we have two distinct Persons, “αυτος δε ο θεος και πατηρ ημων και ο κυριος ημων ιησους χριστος”. Here also we have the two Persons, Who jointly “κατευθυναι”, direct our way in life.

In the next chapter of this Epistle of Paul, we have another interesting reading.

“ο δε κυριος κατευθυναι υμων τας καρδιας εις την αγαπην του θεου και εις υπομονην του χριστου” (3:5)

Which is, “and the Lord may direct your hearts into the love of God and into the steadfastness of Christ”

It is also clear from the Greek here, that we have Three distinct Persons. “ο κυριος (the Lord), and “ του θεου (the God)”, and “του χριστου (the Christ). It is also clear, that “ο κυριος” is not the same as “του θεου”, Who is God the Father. Then we have “του χριστου”, Who is Jesus Christ. “ο κυριος”, can only refer to the Holy Spirit. Paul writes of the Holy Spirit in 2 Corinthians, “ὁ δὲ Κύριος τὸ Πνεῦμά ἐστιν” (3:17), which can be translated as, “now the Spirit is the Lord”, as is also seen in verse 18, “ἀπὸ Κυρίου Πνεύματος”, literally, “from Lord Spirit”, being the One Person.

Here it is clear, that we have THREE distinct Persons, Who are united in their action, by the use of “κατευθυναι”, the SINGULAR, “may direct”. We here have the TRINITY.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ChristisGod

RedFan

Well-Known Member
May 15, 2022
1,207
548
113
69
New Hampshire
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Here we see that the Greek preposition, “δι' (διά), is used with the genitive, where the meaning clearly is that of “agency”.
. . . There is no doubt, that Paul, under the guiding of God the Holy Spirit, wrote “δι' οὗ”, where the meaning clearly is that of AGENCY, and not SOURCE.

Respectfully, I would take issue with your use of "clearly" and "no doubt" here -- for while you may be right on your agency theory, it is far from "clear." I am normally a big fan of Robertson, but I think translating “δι' οὗ” in 1 Cor. 1:9 as “by whom” (identifying a source) rather than “through whom” (identifying action on behalf of another) makes as much if not more sense – as in Matt. 26:24 and Mark 14:21 (δι’ οὗ ὁ Υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου παραδίδοται), Luke 22:22 and 17:1. There are contexts where use of the preposition with the genitive makes more English sense as “through whom” (Rom. 1:5 comes to mind), but I don’t think this is one of them.

Lightfoot, in St. Paul’s Epistles to the Colossians and to Philemon (1875), notes:

“In the Judaic philosophy of Alexandria the preposition διὰ with the genitive was commonly used to describe the function of the Logos in the creation and government of the world; e.g. de Cherub. 35 (I. p. 162) where Philo, enumerating the causes which combine in the work of Creation, describes God as ὑφ’ οὗ, matter as ἐξ οὗ, and the Word as δι’ οὗ; comp. de Mon. ii. 5 (II. p. 225) λόγος ... δι’ οὗ σύμπας ὁ κόσμος ἐδημιουργεῖτο. The Christian Apostles accepted this use of διὰ to describe the mediatorial function of the Word in creation; e.g. John i. 3 πάντα δι’ αὐτοῦ ἐγένετο κ.τ.λ., ib. ver. 10 ὁ κόσμος δι’ αὐτοῦ ἐγένετο, Heb. i. 2 δι’ οὗ καὶ ἐποίησεν τοὺς αἰῶνας.”
 

Episkopos

Well-Known Member
May 17, 2011
12,897
19,474
113
65
Montreal
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
The Father Acts on The Son’s Behalf

It is argued by those who reject the Bible’s teaching, that Jesus Christ is YHWH, Almighty God, The Great I AM, that God the Father is prominent, and Jesus Christ is secondary. Jesus is said to be “sent” by the Father (John 20:21, ect), and Himself says that He can do nothing without the Father (John 5:19, etc).

There are passages in the New Testament, that are clear, that Jesus Christ is not, as The Eternal God, in any way “inferior” to the Father. One such verse is in 1 Corinthians 1:9:

“πιστὸς ὁ θεὸς, δι' οὗ ἐκλήθητε εἰς κοινωνίαν τοῦ υἱοῦ αὐτοῦ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν”

Literally it reads in English, “ Faithful the God through Whom you were called into fellowship with the Son of Him Jesus Christ the Lord of us”

Here we see that the Greek preposition, “δι' (διά), is used with the genitive, where the meaning clearly is that of “agency”. The Father is acting on the behalf of Jesus Christ, as His “agent”, in calling those into fellowship with Jesus. As it stands, this is impossible, if Jesus Christ is “inferior” to God the Father, or a created Person.

Further, we would here expect Paul to write, “ὑπό οὗ (BY Whom)”, the Father as the “source”, and not “agent”. Three Greek manuscripts, D* F G, actually do read “ὑπό οὗ”, instead of, “δι' οὗ”. No doubt to remove this seemingly difficulty, of the Father acting on the Son’s behalf.

Some English versions, like, ESV, CSB, ISV, NET, KJV, NJKV, Weymouth, etc, translate the Greek “δι' οὗ”, as “by whom”, to make the father the “source”, and not “agent”.

The Greek grammarian, Dr Samuel Greek says of the use of “δι'” here:

“The Father is represented as acting on behalf of his Son, to bring Christians into fellowship with Him” (Handbook to the Grammar of the Greek Testament, p. 246)

And, Dr A T Robertson:

“Through whom (δι' ου). God is the agent (δι') of their call as in Ro 11:36 and also the ground or reason for their call (δι' ον) in Heb 2:10” (A T Robertson)

There is no doubt, that Paul, under the guiding of God the Holy Spirit, wrote “δι' οὗ”, where the meaning clearly is that of AGENCY, and not SOURCE.

How can this be the case here, if, as some teach, that God the Father is the only Person Who is God, and that Jesus Christ is His “agent”, someone secondary, “through Whom”, He Acts? For Paul to have written as he does in 1 Corinthians 1:9, it is clear, that Jesus Christ is God, as much as the Father is God, and in no way “inferior”, as the Jehovah’s Witnesses say in their version, for John 1:1, “and the Word was a god”.

In 2 Thessalonians 2:16, we have another interesting reading:

“αυτος δε ο κυριος ημων ιησους χριστος και ο θεος και πατηρ ημων ο αγαπησας ημας και δους παρακλησιν αιωνιαν και ελπιδα αγαθην εν χαριτι”

Literally, “Himself now the Lord of us Jesus Christ and God the Father of us the One having loved us and having given comfort and eternal hope good by grace”

Note the order of Persons here, where Jesus Christ is placed first, and then God the Father. We have two subjects, Jesus Christ and God the Father, Who are united by the use of the Greek article, “ο (the One)”, which is masculine, singular. Paul here invokes Jesus Christ, and the Father, but places Jesus Christ ahead of the Father, but says that BOTH are the equal SOURCE of our “comfort and eternal hope good by grace”. It should be noted here, that it is clear, that Jesus Christ and the Father are distinct Persons, and not one and the same, as some falsely teach. This is seen in the Greek, “αυτος δε ο κυριος ημων ιησους χριστος και ο θεος και πατηρ ημων”. Impossible to refer to a single Person.

In 1 Thessalonians 3:11, the word order is different:

“αυτος δε ο θεος και πατηρ ημων και ο κυριος ημων ιησους χριστος κατευθυναι την οδον ημων προς υμας”

Literally, “Himself now the God and Father of us and the Lord of us Jesus Christ may direct the way of us to you”

Here we have again the two Persons, the Father and Jesus Christ, where the Father is placed first. Again, it is clear that we have two distinct Persons, “αυτος δε ο θεος και πατηρ ημων και ο κυριος ημων ιησους χριστος”. Here also we have the two Persons, Who jointly “κατευθυναι”, direct our way in life.

In the next chapter of this Epistle of Paul, we have another interesting reading.

“ο δε κυριος κατευθυναι υμων τας καρδιας εις την αγαπην του θεου και εις υπομονην του χριστου” (3:5)

Which is, “and the Lord may direct your hearts into the love of God and into the steadfastness of Christ”

It is also clear from the Greek here, that we have Three distinct Persons. “ο κυριος (the Lord), and “ του θεου (the God)”, and “του χριστου (the Christ). It is also clear, that “ο κυριος” is not the same as “του θεου”, Who is God the Father. Then we have “του χριστου”, Who is Jesus Christ. “ο κυριος”, can only refer to the Holy Spirit. Paul writes of the Holy Spirit in 2 Corinthians, “ὁ δὲ Κύριος τὸ Πνεῦμά ἐστιν” (3:17), which can be translated as, “now the Spirit is the Lord”, as is also seen in verse 18, “ἀπὸ Κυρίου Πνεύματος”, literally, “from Lord Spirit”, being the One Person.

Here it is clear, that we have THREE distinct Persons, Who are united in their action, by the use of “κατευθυναι”, the SINGULAR, “may direct”. We here have the TRINITY.

As the MOST HIGH the Father is greater than the Son. How do we know this? If it wasn't already self-evident, Jesus tells us that the Father is greater than He is.

Who believes the words of Jesus? A small minority...and among these those who will then deny that Jesus is fully God.

Now many believe that they honour the words that come from God. But a real test of that is when people will throw out half the verses in favour of misrepresenting...or giving more weight to...other verses that seem to confirm their imbalanced view.

God hates a false balance. We are not to give more weight to some verses than others...ESPECIALLY when the message is repeated over and over again.

So in over-reaction to this "equality" in the GodHead, others choose to respond to the verses that many have thrown on the cutting room floor. They will say...how about these verses? Because of human nature, an opposite polarity will be taken up, by discounting the other verses that are seen erroneously as being more important.

Did Jesus come to reconcile the world to Himself or the Father?

Who is the Head of Jesus? The Head of every man is Christ...and the Head of Christ is God. Now, statements like this seem to make Jesus only human...rather than simply expressing that Jesus IS fully human.

Jesus is fully God AND fully Human. They are the same in nature and character....but very different in stature.

The ONLY way to reconcile ALL the verses of the Bible (in honesty) is to see Jesus as a lesser part of a greater whole within the GodHead. AND to see the Spirit of God as an extension of the Father (called the Spirit of God) and NOT a separate person.

In this way we can escape religious dogmatism in favour of the mystery of God.

The Trinity theory was adopted to give men control over others. Whereas in the Bible we are told that the Head of every man is Christ...not ecclesiastical authority.

A little leaven seems to be leavening the whole batch...well, at least among the majority. Are majorities always right? Quite the opposite actually.

I think it is good to want to see balance restored to Christianity. To allow both sides of the equation to be equally considered. And this will help the Jews come to the faith of Christ. There is no way a Jew will accept that the Spirit of God is not an extension of Him as opposed to another Person. That in itself is enough for the fervent Jew to reject Christianity.

If they are already seeing through our imbalances...how can we then become effective witnesses for Christ?
 

stunnedbygrace

Well-Known Member
Aug 18, 2018
12,397
12,048
113
USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
As the MOST HIGH the Father is greater than the Son. How do we know this? If it wasn't already self-evident, Jesus tells us that the Father is greater than He is.

Who believes the words of Jesus? A small minority...and among these those who will then deny that Jesus is fully God.

Now many believe that they honour the words that come from God. But a real test of that is when people will throw out half the verses in favour of misrepresenting...or giving more weight to...other verses that seem to confirm their imbalanced view.

God hates a false balance. We are not to give more weight to some verses than others...ESPECIALLY when the message is repeated over and over again.

So in over-reaction to this "equality" in the GodHead, others choose to respond to the verses that many have thrown on the cutting room floor. They will say...how about these verses? Because of human nature, an opposite polarity will be taken up, by discounting the other verses that are seen erroneously as being more important.

Did Jesus come to reconcile the world to Himself or the Father?

Who is the Head of Jesus? The Head of every man is Christ...and the Head of Christ is God. Now, statements like this seem to make Jesus only human...rather than simply expressing that Jesus IS fully human.

Jesus is fully God AND fully Human. They are the same in nature and character....but very different in stature.

The ONLY way to reconcile ALL the verses of the Bible (in honesty) is to see Jesus as a lesser part of a greater whole within the GodHead. AND to see the Spirit of God as an extension of the Father (called the Spirit of God) and NOT a separate person.

In this way we can escape religious dogmatism in favour of the mystery of God.

The Trinity theory was adopted to give men control over others. Whereas in the Bible we are told that the Head of every man is Christ...not ecclesiastical authority.

A little leaven seems to be leavening the whole batch...well, at least among the majority. Are majorities always right? Quite the opposite actually.

I think it is good to want to see balance restored to Christianity. To allow both sides of the equation to be equally considered. And this will help the Jews come to the faith of Christ. There is no way a Jew will accept that the Spirit of God is not an extension of Him as opposed to another Person. That in itself is enough for the fervent Jew to reject Christianity.

If they are already seeing through our imbalances...how can we then become effective witnesses for Christ?

I do see that when Jesus walked the earth as a human who had to completely rely on God, He would HAVE to say the Father was greater than He. He had to, because it was the truth.


6 Who, being in very nature God,
did not consider equality with Godsomething to be used to his own advantage;
7 rather, he made himself nothing
by taking the very nature of a servant,
being made in human likeness.
8 And being found in appearance as a man,
he humbled himself
by becoming obedient to death—
even death on a cross!


9 Therefore God exalted him to the highest place
and gave him the name that is above every name,
10 that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow,
in heaven and on earth and under the earth,
11 and every tongue acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord,
to the glory of God the Father.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Azim and Episkopos

ByGraceThroughFaith

Well-Known Member
Mar 14, 2021
2,870
852
113
Dudley
trinitystudies.org
Faith
Christian
Country
United Kingdom
Respectfully, I would take issue with your use of "clearly" and "no doubt" here -- for while you may be right on your agency theory, it is far from "clear." I am normally a big fan of Robertson, but I think translating “δι' οὗ” in 1 Cor. 1:9 as “by whom” (identifying a source) rather than “through whom” (identifying action on behalf of another) makes as much if not more sense – as in Matt. 26:24 and Mark 14:21 (δι’ οὗ ὁ Υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου παραδίδοται), Luke 22:22 and 17:1. There are contexts where use of the preposition with the genitive makes more English sense as “through whom” (Rom. 1:5 comes to mind), but I don’t think this is one of them.

Lightfoot, in St. Paul’s Epistles to the Colossians and to Philemon (1875), notes:

“In the Judaic philosophy of Alexandria the preposition διὰ with the genitive was commonly used to describe the function of the Logos in the creation and government of the world; e.g. de Cherub. 35 (I. p. 162) where Philo, enumerating the causes which combine in the work of Creation, describes God as ὑφ’ οὗ, matter as ἐξ οὗ, and the Word as δι’ οὗ; comp. de Mon. ii. 5 (II. p. 225) λόγος ... δι’ οὗ σύμπας ὁ κόσμος ἐδημιουργεῖτο. The Christian Apostles accepted this use of διὰ to describe the mediatorial function of the Word in creation; e.g. John i. 3 πάντα δι’ αὐτοῦ ἐγένετο κ.τ.λ., ib. ver. 10 ὁ κόσμος δι’ αὐτοῦ ἐγένετο, Heb. i. 2 δι’ οὗ καὶ ἐποίησεν τοὺς αἰῶνας.”

I know of the arguments as given by Lightfoot, which is more to do with theology, than what the Greek text actually says. It is in the thinking of some, that the Father is always "Primary" in the Godhead, and the Son and Holy Spirit, "lesser" than Him. This is heretical, as is the teaching on the Logos by Philo, which was not a Christian.

In Hebrews 2:10, we have the preposition "δι’", ikn the genitive, used for the Father, would you take this to mean "through", as action on behalf of another? If so, then WHO is working THROUGH the Father? If not, then WHY not?
 

ByGraceThroughFaith

Well-Known Member
Mar 14, 2021
2,870
852
113
Dudley
trinitystudies.org
Faith
Christian
Country
United Kingdom
I do see that when Jesus walked the earth as a human who had to completely rely on God, He would HAVE to say the Father was greater than He. He had to, because it was the truth.

This "Greatness" of the Father is not eternal, but functional. We read in Hebrews 2:9, that "Jesus was for a little time made lower than the angers", which is also seen in John 17:5. This relates to the Incarnation, and ot the eternal relationship between the Father and Son, which is clear from the Greek of John 17:5, and the correct reading in John 1:18, "God...Unique God", etc In John 5:23, even the Incarnate Jesus Christ could say that "all must Honour Him in the same way the Honour the Father", which is impossible if He were not 100% coequal with the Father, as GOD
 
  • Like
Reactions: stunnedbygrace

RedFan

Well-Known Member
May 15, 2022
1,207
548
113
69
New Hampshire
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I know of the arguments as given by Lightfoot, which is more to do with theology, than what the Greek text actually says. It is in the thinking of some, that the Father is always "Primary" in the Godhead, and the Son and Holy Spirit, "lesser" than Him. This is heretical, as is the teaching on the Logos by Philo, which was not a Christian.

In Hebrews 2:10, we have the preposition "δι’", ikn the genitive, used for the Father, would you take this to mean "through", as action on behalf of another? If so, then WHO is working THROUGH the Father? If not, then WHY not?


If the "he" is a reference to the Father in Hebrews 2:10 (as I think it is), I would translate this as "by whom" (sui generis source of the action). This makes it theologically consistent with Hebrews 1:2, which would surely render “δι' οὗ” as “through whom” (action on behalf of another).

And it also weighs against the agency interpretation of the phrase in 1 Cor. 1:9 -- at least if we want to make the theology of 1 Cor. 1:9 and Hebrews 1:2 consistent for the English speaking world.

I don't see what Philo's being heretical has to do with his being an example of how the phrase was used in the Greek speaking world of the time.
 

Episkopos

Well-Known Member
May 17, 2011
12,897
19,474
113
65
Montreal
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
I know of the arguments as given by Lightfoot, which is more to do with theology, than what the Greek text actually says. It is in the thinking of some, that the Father is always "Primary" in the Godhead, and the Son and Holy Spirit, "lesser" than Him. This is heretical, as is the teaching on the Logos by Philo, which was not a Christian.

In Hebrews 2:10, we have the preposition "δι’", ikn the genitive, used for the Father, would you take this to mean "through", as action on behalf of another? If so, then WHO is working THROUGH the Father? If not, then WHY not?


You are not, for some reason, seeing the logic of a divine ranking. God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself. So much time is spent thinking about Jesus that the purpose of His coming is lost. Jesus came to reconcile us with God (His Father).

Being reconciled to the Most High God in a supernatural grace is NOT heretical. It is your way of thinking that is heretical by the over-importance you place on a doctrine that closes the mind. We are reconciled to God through Christ. Christ is the intermediary...or Mediator between what is lesser (us) and what is greater (the Father). The clarity of that logic would indeed be understood by everyone...indoctrination notwithstanding.
 
  • Like
Reactions: faithfulness

ByGraceThroughFaith

Well-Known Member
Mar 14, 2021
2,870
852
113
Dudley
trinitystudies.org
Faith
Christian
Country
United Kingdom
If the "he" is a reference to the Father in Hebrews 2:10 (as I think it is), I would translate this as "by whom" (sui generis source of the action). This makes it theologically consistent with Hebrews 1:2, which would surely render “δι' οὗ” as “through whom” (action on behalf of another)

there is not a single verse in the entire Old Testament, that Says God the Father Created "through" Jesus Christ. If you know of one, then please produce it here. Genesis 1:1 is clear, "In the beginning Elohim Created the heavens and the earth", with no reference to Creation "through" anyone?
 

RedFan

Well-Known Member
May 15, 2022
1,207
548
113
69
New Hampshire
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
there is not a single verse in the entire Old Testament, that Says God the Father Created "through" Jesus Christ. If you know of one, then please produce it here. Genesis 1:1 is clear, "In the beginning Elohim Created the heavens and the earth", with no reference to Creation "through" anyone?

I am not aware of any such OT verse, nor am I concerned to find one. That is not my affair. I leave the theology to others. I've been on this post simply to point out that the certainty you exhibited regarding interpretation of “δι' οὗ” in 1 Cor. 1:9 seemed questionable to me, and although your agency theory may well prove correct I've recommended a bit of caution in adopting your translation, for reasons given already.

Agency is just not the usual way one would interpret the use of this preposition followed by the genitive -- a point conceded by one of the sources you cite, Dr. Samuel Green, who wasn’t as dogmatic on the issue as you make him out to be. Here’s the full paragraph whose last sentence you quoted:

"Very rarely it seems to indicate the primary agent. 1 Cor. i. 9: πιστὸς ὁ Θεὸς δ οὗ ἐκλήθητε, k.T.r., God is faithful, by (R.V., through) whom ye were called, etc. Yet even here the proper force of διά is not lost. The Father is represented as acting on behalf of his Son, to bring Christians into fellowship with Him."

Rare indeed. In the NT, in Philo, in just about any First Centurty Greek writing I have ever come across. If you want to debate theology rather than Greek here, I'm probably not your guy. I point to the underlying theology only for what light it may shed on the consistency of NT meaning found through alternative Greek translations.