Samuel Emadi has a good overview-type of article on intertextuality in the latest volume of Currents in Biblical Research (Oct. 2015). The article is entitled, "Intertextuality in New Testament Scholarship: Significance, Criteria, and the Art of Intertextual Reading." Here is the article's abstract.
‘Intertextuality’ is currently a hot topic among biblical interpreters. However, a great deal of debate regarding the locus, purpose, and meaning-effect of an intertextual event, the criteria used to discern the presence of intertexts (if in fact there are any), and the theological value of intertextuality in Scripture still exists. This article surveys these interpretive questions and discusses how the foremost contributors to the conversation have aimed at resolving these hermeneutical tensions. In this article, I examine and compare the hermeneutical methodologies of Richard Hays, Michael Thompson, Dale Allison, Greg Beale, Christopher Beetham, Leroy Huizenga, and Peter Leithart with respect to intertextuality. My aim is to identify the strengths of each contributor’s hermeneutical method, while clarifying where these scholars share similar hermeneutical convictions, as well as where they part ways with one another’s convictions about the practice of intertextual reading.And here is part of the conclusion to the article.
Each of the above authors has made significant contributions to the discussion of intertextuality. Hays's work is foundational, and has charted the trajectory of the conversation ever since its publication in 1989. Allison and Leithart's resurfacing of the value of patristic exegesis is a helpful corrective, and indicates that we need a fresh, open look at what the fathers have to teach us about reading the Bible. Beale's works have shown an unrelenting zeal to be robustly biblical in the hermeneutical endeavor. Likewise, Leithart's timely and essential proposal is that being a good interpreter is more about being a certain type of person, and less about doing certain things.