Ivar Vegge argues that Paul, in line with ancient moral philosophers, letter-writers, and rhetoricians, used idealized praise in 2 Cor 1-9, and particularly in 2 Cor 7:5-16, and blame or threats, especially in 2 Cor 10-13, to promote reconciliation between the Corinthians and Paul as apostle.

Ivar Vegge shows that the ancient Mediterranean world was especially sensitive to idealized praise and blame or threats as hortative means. This is reflected in the pedagogy of the moral philosophers (psychagogy) and in the letter-writing tradition (epistolography), and to some extent also in the rhetorical tradition. Paul utilizes this method in 2 Corinthians.
Developing a suggestion by R. Bieringer, the author starts by arguing that 2 Cor 7:5-16 is a highly idealized description of reconciliation (i.e. praise) where the aim is to exhort to full reconciliation. He then interprets a number of idealized expressions of confidence in the addressee - spread throughout the letter - as supporting the appeals for reconciliation with Paul and the collection. 2 Cor 10-13 resembles the harsh tone and aim of Paul's "tearful letter" - i.e. sorrow leading to the Corinthians' repentance and finally to reconciliation with Paul (cf. 2 Cor 2:1-4; 7:5-12), as claimed by partition theories (Hausrath-Kennedy, Weiss-Bultmann and Schmithals-Bornkamm) - but is not itself the "tearful letter." Paul simply reuses the same strategy.
The apologetic elements in the letter repeatedly lead up to and substantiate the appeals for reconciliation. This leads to the conclusion that 2 Corinthians is one single letter about reconciliation.

Autorentext
Born 1965; 2001 Doctor of Theology at Norwegian School of Theology, Oslo; 2002-2006 Lecturer at Mekane Yesus Theological Seminary (Ethiopia) and at Ethiopian Graduate School of Theology; spring 2007 adjunct lecturer at Ansgar School of Theology and Mission and at Agder University College (both in Kristiansand, Norway).