Which of Julie Green’s public prophecies can be independently verified and what were their outcomes?
Executive summary
Julie Green publishes a catalog of spoken and filmed “prophecies” on her ministry website and Rumble channel, and observers disagree sharply on whether those predictions have been fulfilled; available primary sources list prophecies and videos but do not provide independent, systematic verification of outcomes [1] [2]. Independent, third‑party fact‑checking or archived contemporaneous records tying specific dated prophecies to verifiable outcomes are not present in the sources provided, leaving assessment constrained to claims on or about Green’s own platforms and commentary by supporters and critics [1] [2] [3] [4].
1. What Julie Green publicly posts and how those posts are dated
Julie Green Ministries publishes text and video “prophecies” on its website and Rumble channel, and the ministry states that prophecies are cataloged by the date the word was received rather than the date of publication, which complicates time‑stamping for independent verification [2]. The publicly accessible prophecies page lists prophetic statements and themes—examples include warnings about “sudden deaths” among enemies and other generalized future events—but the published entries typically present the prophecy text without contemporaneous documentation tying them to later news reports or objective timelines on the ministry site itself [1].
2. What independent verification exists in the provided reporting
The supplied sources do not contain third‑party records that confirm specific prophecies and outcomes; the ministry’s own pages and an index entry provide background and lists of prophecies, while a critical article and its comment thread debate accuracy and fulfillment but do not settle discrete matches between dated predictions and independently verifiable events [1] [2] [3] [4]. In short, within the documents reviewed there is no systematic, independent verification tying a named prophecy to a documented, time‑stamped real‑world outcome—so claims of fulfilled prophecies rest primarily on the ministry’s presentation and on partisan commentary rather than neutral corroboration [1] [2] [4].
3. Areas where verification might be feasible but is not shown here
Because the ministry timestamps when words were “received” and posts videos, an audit could in theory match a dated prophecy to contemporaneous news records or archived video uploads to test fulfillment; however, the sources provided do not include such an audit or external timeline, nor do they include a third‑party fact‑check compiling hits and misses for Green’s prophecies [2]. Supporters quoted in a critical response argue that she has had “numerous prophecies that have come to pass,” while critics say missed or vague predictions disqualify her under traditional prophetic tests—but those are argumentative claims, not independent datasets presented in these sources [4].
4. What can reasonably be concluded from the available material
Based on the available reporting, the only verifiable facts are that Julie Green publishes dated prophetic content and that her ministry warns readers about social‑political and personal events; assessing which of her prophecies can be independently verified or adjudicating their outcomes requires external cross‑checking of specific prophecy dates and texts against independent news archives, court records, or other contemporaneous evidence—a step that the provided sources do not take [1] [2] [3]. Readers should therefore treat claims of fulfilled prophecies as unverified by neutral evidence within these materials, note that both supporters and critics make strong, conflicting assertions [4], and recognize an implicit agenda on ministry pages to present prophecies as authoritative while critique sites aim to challenge prophetic legitimacy.