If you want an INTJ to like you, be persistent and highly suggestive to the point of nearing directness.
Jokingly say "I love you" when he says something funny, demands hugs from him, etc.
Be playful and blatant in your affection. He'll probably try to convince himself that you're annoying, but he will give in.
He'll brush off the hug and the playful "I love you" like he's annoyed or gives zero shits, but he likes it, trust me.
Most people default to disliking INTJs if we don't hide our true personality. Having someone repeatedly tell us that they like our personality feels great, but is confusing at first.
Additionally, younger INTJs are not romantic. So when I say "Tell him to hug you", "Tell him to say hello to you", "Tell him to kiss you more often", etc. I actually mean to fucking do it.
Do it playfully though, he will dismiss you if he interprets them as commands or purely as complaints.
YES: "Why don't you hug me more often?! I love your hugs!"
NO: "I feel like you just don't like hugging me."
YES: "Hold hands with me more often! I want people to know we're a couple!"
NO: "You never hold hands with me..."
This is more of a bubbly interaction. But it's the type of affection they prefer, blatant and playful. They like their egos to be stroked, they won't brag about it, however, and it won't go to their head because they tend to be grounded.
If you can do this simple thing while also appearing intelligent, you've got him in the mouse trap. He will become abnormally attracted to you.
In any case, an INTJ will allow himself to be stalked by an ENFP until he eventually accepts that they are dating.
[Also, INTJs can vibe with the soft-spoken, intellectual type of girl... but I doubt these type of girls would be asking for more affection like you are - they'd be content with dialogue in itself.]
INTJs will virtually never "go with the flow" unless it is reasonably advantageous wherein this advantage can be rationalized and explained with logic. Just a side note.
It is the sole premise for our thought process. You will never convince me that inanity for the sake of inanity is more advantageous than logic.