Which of Julie Green’s prophecies do her supporters point to as already fulfilled and how do they document fulfillment?
Executive summary
Supporters of Julie Green point to a set of named prophecies published on Julie Green Ministries’ website and to third‑party compilations (notably video compilations on platforms like Rumble) as already fulfilled, and they document fulfillment chiefly by juxtaposing the dated prophetic text or video with later news events and by circulating edited compilations and social posts that claim a match [1] [2] [3]. Critics dispute those matches and note failed or imprecise predictions; the debate in available reporting is framed around the ministry’s own archive and independent aggregator videos rather than systematic, independent verification [4] [5].
1. What supporters list as “fulfilled” — specific prophecies named
Supporters commonly cite several titled words/prophecies from the Julie Green Ministries catalog as fulfilled, including entries headlined “THINGS ARE HEATING UP, AND WILL COMPLETELY CHANGE,” “EVIDENCE IS COMING THAT WILL TAKE MANY OUT OF THEIR POSITIONS,” “THE SWAMP IS BEING DESTROYED,” and “ENEMIES OF ALMIGHTY GOD ARE IN THE DIRECT LINE OF FIRE,” all of which appear in a compilation of purportedly fulfilled items circulated online [2], and many more similar dated items are available directly on the Julie Green Ministries prophecies page [1].
2. How the ministry itself presents fulfillment and timing
Julie Green Ministries frames its prophecies as divinely timed and emphasizes that “God’s timing is always perfect” and “He always fulfills His promises,” presenting the prophecies on a searchable media/prophecy index and categorizing them by the date the word was received so followers can track chronology [3] [1]. That framing functions as the ministry’s internal documentation method: publish the dated word, then later point to current events as the fulfilment narrative [3].
3. How independent supporters document “fulfilled” claims
Independent supporters and promoters assemble video compilations and social clips that splice Green’s dated prophecies together with footage and headlines of later news events; an example is a Rumble compilation that lists the prophecy titles and asserts they were fulfilled, often adding emphatic labels (e.g., “BIDEN FALLS AGAIN”) and providing links back to the ministry’s original prophecy pages [2]. These compilations serve as the public evidence package for supporters: timestamped prophecy texts or clips plus montage of alleged real‑world correspondences [2].
4. The evidentiary gap critics point to
Skeptical observers highlight that the available materials are primarily the ministry’s own archive and partisan compilations rather than independent, contemporaneous forecasting records rigorously tied to outcome criteria; a critical treatment in the public record questions whether some prophecies were inaccurate or remain unfulfilled and urges scrutiny of selective matching [4]. The reporting available does not show third‑party verification that establishes an objective standard for when a prophecy is counted as fulfilled versus retrofitted to events [4] [3].
5. Narratives and possible incentives shaping documentation
The documentation practices—publishing dated words, then amplifying them through edited compilations and social‑media reposting—create a feedback loop beneficial to both the ministry’s growth and the viral, confirmatory instincts of followers; independent promoters who compile “fulfilled” reels can gain views and influence by presenting neat one‑to‑one correspondences, while the ministry’s indexing and devotional framing reinforce believers’ acceptance that prophecies are being realized [1] [2] [3]. Observers such as prophecy tracking sites capture biographical context about Green but do not adjudicate fulfillment claims themselves [5].
6. What the current reporting cannot confirm
Available sources show which prophecies supporters claim were fulfilled and how supporters document those claims (ministry pages plus compilation videos), but they do not provide an independent, event‑by‑event verification that the prophecies met pre‑specified criteria for fulfillment; therefore the assessment of whether a given prophecy has objectively come to pass remains unresolved in the provided reporting [1] [2] [3] [4].