So is neo-Paganism just LARPing or does it have more substance, Veeky Forums?

Religion is what happens when LARP gets out of hand

Hellenic

...

>The fact that it's all metaphor pretty much confirms it.
Not every Neo-Pagan outfit utilizes the psychological model.

>they refuse to do proper sacrifice because it's icky, or it doesn't matter, or its not the important part, or whatever other excuse they have also means they don't believe this shit has physical consequences.
Cultus Sabbati and Thelema and Tantra and most Afro-Carib and a healthy number of Amerind groups practice sacrifice, among a number of Greek flavored mystics of which there are still a handful.

>No Neo-Germanic pagan sanctifies with blood
Bullshit.

>no one sacrifices living things
Also bullshit.

>Bullshit.

Yes, indeed, it's bullshit that none of them properly bleed something for their sanctification.

>Also bullshit.

Indeed, it's like the most important part of half the rituals.

>Not every Neo-Pagan outfit utilizes the psychological model.

Indeed, a bunch of others also see it as manifestations of some bullshit spiritism rooted mostly in half understood Wicca nonsense. (Not that there's Wicca that isn't nonsense)

They still haven't made a coherent religion. It's just not "organic".

define coherent

I don't understand how folks unironically assert their generalizations as fact when it only takes a single example of contrary behavior to prove them wrong.

There are in fact pagans out there who participate in sacrifice. I've interacted with 'em.

>bullshit spirit-ism
Do you actually think it's physically impossible for a curious pagan to go to their local library and order any given academic text with the anthro-historical perspective?

>wicca that isn't nonsense
I'd direct you to Arthur Gauntlet's grimoire but that seems relatively futile if you've already made up your mind about the historicity of Western witchcraft.

Yes

They don't even believe in their gods, and are certainly not ready to die for them.

Just get a small god statue, give it some bread and fresh wine daily. Then when you die you get to go to the Elysian Fields.

>I'd direct you to Arthur Gauntlet's grimoire but that seems relatively futile if you've already made up your mind about the historicity of Western witchcraft.

I have, because I studied it.
Basically everything Gardener asserted about European history vis a vis witchcraft is unsubstantiated or directly flatly wrong.

>Do you actually think it's physically impossible for a curious pagan to go to their local library and order any given academic text with the anthro-historical perspective?

No, a lot of you have to have done it to get the outfits right for your LARPING, but apart from those guys I'll assert that none of you fucking do.

>I don't understand how folks unironically assert their generalizations as fact when it only takes a single example of contrary behavior to prove them wrong.

Indeed, So it'd be easy for you find me a fucking example.

>Gardener
The fact that you think Gardner is the definitive source of witchcraft in the West shows me that you've not kept up with academia.

>No, a lot of you have to have done it to get the outfits right for your LARPING, but apart from those guys I'll assert that none of you fucking do.
Cool rhetoric, do I get points for throwing more poison in the well?

>Indeed, So it'd be easy for you find me a fucking example.
Sure would if you spent some time in the right currents. I imagine that's too much fieldwork for your Veeky Forums shitposts, though.

>The fact that you think Gardner is the definitive source of witchcraft in the West shows me that you've not kept up with academia.

That's literally the opposite of what I said.
Go back, try again.

>Sure would if you spent some time in the right currents. I imagine that's too much fieldwork for your Veeky Forums shitposts, though.

I do, sadly, spend my time with a fuck ton of pagans.
It's why I'm so very sure about my stuff.

if not Gardner

who is it then?

>That's literally the opposite of what I said.
>I studied it.
>Basically everything Gardener asserted
If you studied this material you'd know that Gardner's essentially irrelevant to the traditional witchcraft movement.

>I do, sadly, spend my time with a fuck ton of pagans.
As do I which is why I'm so very sure that your knowledge is minimal at best.

Except that's bullshit.
His entire dual-theistic pop spiritualism is the literal BASIS of Wicca.

>As do I which is why I'm so very sure that your knowledge is minimal at best.

As opposed to yours, which is so very vast you can't provide a single argument except going "No but really I'm totes right".

As of now? Andrew Chumbley who founded the Cultus Sabbati and Xoanon Press (and by extension laid the groundwork for Three Hands Press) and died while working on a History of Religion PhD (Dissertation incomplete/unpublished, maybe...sorta depends on how much of his academic material made into the publications and Schulke doesn't seem to be telling) attempting to trace a lineage of valid and historical witchcraft from the materials around Arthur Gauntlet and Saducismus Triumphatus coupled with physical evidence such as witch bottles bearing Agrippan sigilry through Essex through Spare and into the modern era.

Just because the Murrayan witch cult hypothesis got BTFO long ago doesn't mean that the witch cult hypothesis writ large has been put to bed.

>you can't provide a single argument except going "No but really I'm totes right".
I don't exactly see a reason to give you anything more than "nope" when your entire argument is you're 115% correct in your massive generalizations just 'cause.
>It's why I'm so very sure about my stuff.
>I have, because I studied it.
>Yes, indeed, it's bullshit that none of them properly bleed something for their sanctification.
>Also, the fact that they refuse to do proper sacrifice because it's icky, or it doesn't matter, or its not the important part, or whatever other excuse they have also means they don't believe this shit has physical consequences.
If your say-so is good enough, mine is too :^)

My claim is a negative one dipshit :^)

Literally four seconds on google.

Fuck, August Sol Invictus, United States Senate candidate in the 2016 Florida election, got booted from the OTO for a goat sacrifice on their time (the Ordo Templi Orientis politely requests that you consume drugs or sacrifice animals outside of function hours, which generally means a half hour before the start and a half hour after end).

Yes and no. They are an assorted group of people.

I would guess that the ones who are LARPers are the ones who are in these religions for "ethnic' reasons. Whereas a Greek pagan in Greece (who aren't exactly welcome in their super greek-orthodox country) has no real reason to play pretend.

You can divide neo-paganism into the religions who try to reconstruct old religions as much as possible, and those who are following a modern religion that looks at older ones for inspiration. Wiccans worship nature and look to celtic influences, but they don't worship Gaul deities of yore afaik.

Take Satanism, if that counts as neo-paganism. The biggest branch are just atheists being contrarians, with other types of Satanism actually believing in Satan.

Some are LARPers, some are not.

>Some are LARPers, some are not.
This concept appears to be more advanced than large swaths of this board is capable of grasping.

kek

This right here. And what I see in the picture aren't "neo-pagans" but an old thousand year traditions that still exist you uncultured prick. If they're larping they're not pretending they're pagans but Scandinavians.