When I see the NT making use of OT texts for a future sense, there are generally three ways I see for us to approach it. (1) If the OT text is a statement in generalities, then the NT is free to use it as it sees fit. (2) If the OT text has a prophecy that does not seem to constrain itself to a specific time before the coming of Jesus, the NT is free to apply it to Jesus as it sees fits. (3) If the OT text has a prophecy that does constrain itself to a specific time before the coming of Jesus, then any NT uses of that are midrashic; the speaker/writer is not claiming that the original text, which up to that time was seen as already being fulfilled in the past, was actually about this new or future event. Instead, they are reapplying it because of typological comparisons. (And this isn't the same thing as 'dual fulfillment'.)
When I find a prophecy that, within its natural context, constrains itself to a fulfillment before the time of Jesus or the Apostles, yet they seem to be saying it is in their future, most Christians (I'm speaking in generalities) don't even consider approach number 3, even though midrashic approach was a viable method of interpretation in the first century. Let's do a few examples, just so I know I'm being clear.
Matthew uses Hosea 11.1b, 'God called his son out of Egypt'. Is it about Jesus (as Matthew says), or was it about the exodus (as Hosea's context requires). A midrashic approach allows both Hosea 11 to be read in its natural context (Hosea is looking at the past exodus event), and it allows Matthew to claim Jesus fulfilled that prophecy (based on a typological reapplication of the concept of the Son of God being called out of Egypt). Same thing goes for stuff like Isaiah 7.14, or Daniel's abominable desolation.
The approach of midrash doesn't require ripping Hosea 11.1b, or Isaiah 7.14, or Daniel's abominable desolation out of their original contexts, it requires embracing those original contexts, all the while making typological reapplications out of them. A very, very clear example of this is in Paul's letter to the Galatians, when he uses Hagar and Sarah typologically. He's not simply reducing the story Hagar and Sarah into a non-historical allegory, he fully acknowledges the original context, but he's reapplying their story for a new thing.