Who are the postmillennialists who have written in modern times? The Christian marketplace is filled with dispensationalist “prophecy experts.” But are there any modern proponents of postmillennialism? And if so, who are they?
Though they seldom write multi-billion selling books. And despite the fact they almost never have movie series based on their theological writings. And though their prophecy charts are seldom in four-color format, modern postmillennialists have existed during the whole time of the dispensational hegemony, from when it was created (1830) to the present.
Generic postmillennialists of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries generally do not hold that the Jewish people will return to their land as a fulfillment of prophecy — though Iain Murray and Erroll Hulse are notable contemporary exceptions. They also believe that the millennium spans all of the new covenant phase of church history, developing incrementally from the time of Christ until his Second Advent.
Prominent generic postmillennial writers include: Jonathan Edwards (1703-1758), William Carey (1761-1834), Robert Haldane (1764-1842), Archibald Alexander (1772-1851), Charles Hodge (1797-1878), Albert Barnes (1798-1870), David Brown (1803-1897), Patrick Fairbairn (1805-1874), Richard C. Trench (1807-1886), J. A. Alexander (1809-1860), William G. T. Shedd (1820-1894), A. A. Hodge (1823-1886), Augustus H. Strong (1836-1921), H. C. G. Moule (1841-1920), B. B. Warfield (1851-1921), O. T. Allis (1880-1973), J. Gresham Machen (1881-1937), John Murray (1898-1975), Loraine Boettner (1903-1989), and J. Marcellus Kik (1903-1965). Contemporary defenders include: Norman Shepherd, John Jefferson Davis, Erroll Hulse, Iain Murray, Donald Macleod, Douglas Kelly, John R. deWitt, J. Ligon Duncan, Henry Morris III, and Willard Ramsey.
Eschatological Themes: Postmillennialism and Preterism (7 CDs)
These lectures cover themes important for understanding the relationship of preterism and postmillennialism.
The issues covered are not only important but fascinating as you come to realize better and better
that the looming of AD 70 had an enormous influence on the New Testament.
See more study materials at: www.KennethGentry.com
A development within the postmillennial tradition since the 1960s is known as Christian Reconstructionism, involving “theonomic” ethics (“theonomy”= “God’s Law”). Theonomic postmillennialism (a feature of Christian Reconstructionism) combines the inter-advental gradualism of the modern generic variety with the socio-political interests of the older Puritan form. The theonomic postmillennialist sees the gradual return to biblical norms of civil justice as a consequence of widespread gospel success through preaching, evangelism, missions, and Christian education. The judicial-political outlook of Reconstructionism includes the application of those justice-defining directives contained in the Old Testament legislation, when properly interpreted, adapted to new covenant conditions, and relevantly applied. 
Despite widespread misunderstanding of the Reconstructionist interest in socio-political matters, evangelical theologian Ronald H. Nash notes: “It does not take a postmillennialist to see that their account of the central role that evangelism and Christian obedience to the Word of God must play in the transformation of society is miles removed from the repeated distortions” common among certain opponents.  As Mark Noll expresses it: “Theonomy sounds a good deal like populist libertarianism, yet by insisting on carefully formulated theological foundations for political action, it too pushes toward a more self-conscious political reflection than is customary in the evangelical tradition.” 
Reconstructionists hold strongly to a separation of church and state.  Consequently, they reject the sometimes overly close church-state relationship advocated by many of the English and New England Puritans. Nevertheless, they do admire the Puritans’s deep interest in and work for the application of the whole Word of God to all matters of life, including civil jurisprudence. One Puritan example who serves as a clear forerunner to the Reconstructionist outlook, is the prominent Scottish divine George Gillespie, who is known as “one of the brightest stars” of the Westminster Assembly.  Gillespie argues: “the Christian Magistrate is bound to observe the judicial laws of Moses, as well as the Jewish Magistrate was.” He also notes that Christ’s words in Matthew 5:17-19 (a favorite text of Reconstructionists) “are comprehensive of the judicial law, it being a part of the law of Moses.”  In that many opponents of Reconstructionism recognize the similarity between it and Puritanism in this regard. In fact, Christian Reconstructionism is often called Neo-Puritanism.
1. For a thorough and academic presentation and defense of theonomic ethics, see: Greg L. Bahnsen, Theonomy in Christian Ethics, 2d. ed. (Phillipsburg, N.J.: Presbyterian and Reformed, 1982).
 Ronald H. Nash, Great Divides: Understanding the Controversies That Come Between Christians (Colorado Springs, Colo.: NavPress, 1993), 164-65
 Mark A. Noll, The Scandal of the Evangelical Mind (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1994), 225.
 Greg L. Bahnsen, Theonomy in Christian Ethics, ch. 20
 Philip Schaff, The Creeds of Christendom, vol. 1: The History of Creeds, 6th ed. (New York: Harper and Row, 1931; reprint, Grand Rapids: Baker, 1990), 746.
 George Gillespie, “Wholesome Severity Reconciled with Christian Liberty,” reprinted in vol. 4 of Christopher Coldwell, ed., Anthology of Presbyterian & Reformed Literature (Dallas, Tex.: Naphtali, 1991), 182.