&gt; Supposedly it doesn&#x27;t matter what you do, it matters what you feel.<p>I think I see what you mean. But this is not how I read Corinthians; but I agree that this may not be shared either, and I won&#x27;t make this about religion, I&#x27;m really talking about the text itself.<p>First, it does not put love before actions. It says actions&#x2F;qualities (or that most of life, actually) is meaningless, nothing, without love (as an attachment to God&#x2F;Truth)<p>Second, it defines what is definitely not &quot;love&quot;, so one may not use it as a pretext for wrong doing (at least).<p>Third, it says that we will never see things fully, neither at once, until, that is, the end (provided it&#x27;s not an ellipsis, he! :) ).<p>Plus, &quot;love&quot; as expressed in this text is not Philia (<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Philia" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Philia</a>) but from Latin Caritas (<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Charity_%28virtue%29" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Charity_%28virtue%29</a>) (or Greek &quot;agape&quot;); which is not about a feeling, but about something way deeper, transcendant and, although not quite the right word, respectful, for one to an other. It&#x27;s love as one of the three Christian theological virtues (fides, spes, caritas), that is, in an intimate relation to the Christian God (in this context) as a guide, a goal, an ideal for love&#x2F;Philia too.<p>&gt; That love is genuine, and it doesn&#x27;t redeem the action.<p>I see your point. That love is, actually, deeply misled. Actually, that&#x27;s not love, that&#x27;s fear that supersedes love (&quot;I fear that you [x] and I don&#x27;t want to because this makes me [y] and I freak out and I don&#x27;t think you can decide for yourself, so I&#x27;ll do it and [z]&quot;).<p>Love (be it eros, philia or even agape) is no excuse to abuse. Good intentions don&#x27;t make an excuse for incompetence.