[Abigail Adams]

"I do not believe that he or Christianity endorsed slavery, however, that was the times and age that he was living in, and even today we still have slavery in parts of the world. I think Paul was trying to tell the slaves not to make matters worse and try to make a bad situation work out for the good."

Because Paul's comments on slavery are part of his overall instructions in this part of his letter, which includes the instructions about wives and husbands, shouldn't all of the instructions be interpreted in the same way? Either as commands to be followed for all time and eternity, or as commands that fit the time and culture he lived in. We can't say that wives must submit to their husbands today, just as they did back in Paul's day, without also saying that slaves should be obedient to their masters today. Just my .02 on the matter.

[Mr. Jeeves]

You're right. Paul's writings were aimed at the near-Islamic Middle Eastern tribal cultures of the day, and no doubt he was just advising women to "make the best of a bad situation", much as some Muslim Imams do today.

It's funny and rather sad to watch modern commentators like the author of the article try to retrofit such ancient "woman=bad=dirty=unclean" tribal taboos to work in the modern world.

[Prophet in the wilderness]

As the husband as the head of the household is in now way for the wife to be a slave.
God is the one who ordained for the husband to be the head authority and leader in the household, and is no way to diminish the part that the woman has in both " MAN & WOMAN in CHRIST ".
but, as a family unit, God placed the husband to be the head authority and leader, and placed much responsibility on the husband.
God placed both parents to be the authority over the children.
In God's universe, there is order, and without order ( as we see today in one parent households, and society ) we have chaos, and disorder, with much thanks to the feminist.