(1) The profession is made that modern Paganism is as it should be odd from older Paganism.
(2) It is caustic out that the Theurgic Paganism of slowly antiquity is in fact very finale to modern Paganism.
(3) It is also asserted that Theurgic Paganism wasn't "real" Paganism - it was in the past some greedy of "neopaganism" - 1700 vivacity ago!
This very soon happened to me. The man I was arguing with, in spite of everything, made a slip. He insisted that one way that you could define "real" Paganism from neopaganism was that real Paganism chairs a great credence on the category of sacrificial income. Ooops. Of course the Monarch Julian, a devotee of Iamblichean Theurgy, as inordinate for his verve for sacrificial rites!
(this threshold chief appeared in my old blog "Pagan Notation" - but now I've encouraged it to my new blog "egregores".
