phil - apologies for the delay in response - it got overlooked in the activities of life

I thought your comments were lively and appreciative of the midrashes. Your comment upon Jeremiah 31 seemed spot on. Ditto regarding the 2 Corinthians 3 passage and I certainly wouldn’t object to your interesting identification of a midrash or remez with respect to Jesus deity.

John 6 is interesting.

• Perhaps the obvious midrash is with regards to the manna which fell from heaven and sustained the "children of Israel," post-Exodus, on their passage through the wilderness, which speaks of the spiritual and practical sustenance that will come to a believer by faith in the new covenant.
• What you refer to as the Eucharist, would have been known to the disciples and Yeshua (Jesus) himself as the Seder or Pesach (Passover) meal, which again looks back towards the Exodus events and the deliverance from both slavery and death, as well as the kinsmen-redemption that was implied in YHVH’s actions.
• Apparently, eating and drinking is sometimes rabbinically interpreted as a metaphorical reference to Torah and good works - a midrash that is less easy for us to adapt our thinking towards, but there we are.
• Some or all of these midrashic elements would have been understood by Jesus’ hearers and contributed to their reasons for eithe rejecting his nuanced invitation or deciding to continue to follow him.

Hebrews 1

• This midrash is not particularly obvious and I wonder now whether I cited an incorrect passage…nevertheless, there is something there so here goes…
• Firstly, the reference to Firstborn Son is an echo of Exodus 4.22, where Israel is identified as God’s Firstborn. The co-identification of Yeshua with the people of Israel is a common allusion within the New Covenant (as mentioned in my original post)
• As regards "becoming Father / Son" I think this is a reference to the fulfillment of the "Son of David" prophecy given in 2 Samuel 7.4-17. It draws upon the language of Psalm 2 to declare (see Hebrews 5.5, Acts 2.36 and 13.33-34) that the crucified Jesus had been enthroned / exalted as Lord and Messiah [an idea that might even contribute to Peter / Andrew’s / KingJames1 debate on the Coming of the Son of Man, but honestly, I don’t want to go there - I notice that even the tireless Andrew has wisely stepped back from it for a while to draw breath etc]
• Interestingly, D.S. Stern identifies Hebrews 1.6b as providing another indirect identification (remez?) of Jesus with God, since the original object of worship, in the quoted text of Psalm 97.7, was Adonai.

Romans 10

• I suggested this passage was littered with midrashes so along with your suggestions, here goes:
• a midrash upon Leviticus 18.5, explains that the Torah (teaching, commandments of God) and the Holy Spirit both offer one and the same eternal life (see Jewish New Testament Commentary for further exegesis of this idea)
• Paul continues with a midrash upon Deuteronomy 30.11-14 to demonstrate the role of confession in deliverance / salvation
• He uses Isaiah 28.16 and Joel 2.32 to demonstrate that salvation is available to all, regardless of being Jew or Gentile
• He anticipates the Messianic prophecy of Isaiah 53 and uses it to explain the importance to trust (faith) of "hearing" the message of the Messiah,
• finally he midrashically weaves together Psalm 19.4, Deuteronomy 32.21, Isaiah 65.1,2 with 2 Chronicles 20.7 and Psalm 105.6 to demonstrate to his people, the Jews,  the longsuffering of Adonai in the face of their diobedience and the intention of Adonai to make them jealous over the non-nation (unelect peoples), the Gentiles, to whom salvation is now being offered!!

The Complete Jewish Bible has bold text to highlight the hundreds (430+ ?) Tanakh ("Old Testament") citations, which helps considerably in identification and serves to highlight how typically Jewish it is to perform midrashes upon the texts and how un-Jewish it is, and to some extent futile, to determinedly limit understanding and interpretation to historical-critical interpretation alone.

Finally, the tricky, Matthew 2.23 is a perfect example of this - a passage that could cause strict historical-critics to tear their hair out, or revert to the easier option of assuming writer error…

• although Matthew, writing to a Jewish audience, refers to "the Prophets" he, unusually, makes no particular citation, suggesting he refers to a general concept found in several prophets
• some has suggested a link to the Nazarite vows of Numbers 6, but there is no record of Jesus, who was not an ascetic (Matthew 11.16-19), ever did such a thing
• a possibility is by a veiled reference to Yeshua coming from Nazareth - a despised place (John 1.46) - he may have been highlighting the many passages which speak of the Messiah being despised (Psalm 22, Isaiah 52.13-53.12 etc), inferring that the prophecies are fulfilled, in part, by his being a Natzrati (resident of N.)
• a third possibility is that Matthew is referring to the prediction that the Messiah will be a netzer ("branch") from the stock of Jesse (Isaiah 11.1, an idea developed by other prophets - Jeremiah 23.5, 33.15, Zechariah 3.8, 6.12 - though they use another word, tzemach ("sprout").
• David Stern suggests Matthew is making a word-play on both these last two options - a typical technique common in Jewish writings. Yeshua is both netzer and Natzrati.

I hope you enjoyed sharing in these interesting discoveries. I have found the Jewish roots of my faith an invaluable source of both "light and truth" and encouragement. May you find them so.

shalom! - john