Slavery is a social institution – or was in the ancient world. The Pope made it semi-religious and Christians in this country opposed freeing the slaves based on arguments in the Bible.

I agree with you about Spartacus. Howard Fast, who wrote the novel upon which the Kirk Douglas movie is based, was a Marxist, which is why I refer to him as a "socialist hero" – he has nothing to do with any historical Spartacus, though the film is entertaining once you get past the initial burst of anti-Roman, pro-Christian rhetoric in the introduction.

Abolition of slavery was unknown to Christianity, or any of the other two monotheistic religions, and it's unfortunate that they should speak to the contrary. It is also a fact, that many slaves received good treatment from their masters in the Greco-Roman world. Many slaves who were set free upon serving their masters with dedication, became famous philosophers and authors.

The "Spartacus was an ancient Socialist hero" line is as meaningless as saying that the leaders of the French Revolution were Socialists. In reality, Socialism/Communism's idea of creating a "proletarian class" was unknown to both Spartacus and the French revolutionaries. Marxists tend to look at all revolutionaries as Socialists, without realizing that the principles of Socialism were foreign to these other revolutionaries.

I agree with you that Spartacus would have owned a few slaves himself, had he been in the position to do so.

People who are not pagans and who may read this, are likely to think that we're in favour of slavery, which is wrong. We are only attempting to clear up a few wrong ideas people have in connection with slavery and Christianity's view on the subject.

Naturally the pro-slavery group had a much easier time, thanks to Paul. The pro-abolition group had to jump through more rhetorical hoops to reach their goal.