The majority of translations and commentaries render the phrase κνηθόμενοι τὴν ἀκοήν in 2 Tim 4.3 as ‘having itching ears’ (or something to the same effect). Many commentaries and lexica claim, furthermore, that this figure of speech expresses curiosity. The present study demonstrates that the phrase found in 2 Tim 4.3 is an idiom that occurs quite frequently in first- and second-century ce literature. Contemporary usage of this expression suggests, first, that the translation at 2 Tim 4.3 should be ‘having their ears tickled’, rather than ‘having itching ears’, and, second, that the idiom refers primarily to the experience of pleasure rather than curiosity. This translation and interpretation of κνηθόμενοι τὴν ἀκοήν fits the context of 2 Timothy better than other commonly proposed readings and is significant for how we understand the author's portrayal of his opponents and their appeal to the believers.

The perspective on the Pastoral Epistles presented in this paper differs from the established scholarly consensus and moves beyond the controversy concerning pseudonymity versus authenticity. After examining the development of the ‘Corpus Pastorale’ theory and clarifying some methodological questions, the paper argues for an interpretation of the Pastorals separately from each other and in their specific relation to Paul and his tradition. Significant examples indicate the possibility of understanding 2 Timothy and Titus as authentic letters of Paul, whereas 1 Timothy proves to belong to the second century ce. From this perspective, many otherwise contradictory aspects of the history of interpretation regain their rationale.

Following the recent emphasis on studying early Christian manuscripts as historical artefacts, whose text and meta-textual aspects comprise important embodiments of reception and interpretation, this article re-examines the early Titus fragment 𝔓32 (P.Ryl. Gr. 1.5) with respect to its physical situation within the manuscript. I expand the scope of current reconstructions to consider in detail the lost beginning of the epistle, and argue that Titus was not the first document in the codex: at least one other preceded. Although the identity of the accompanying material cannot be deduced codicologically, patristic evidence suggests that Titus was normally transmitted in a collection of thirteen or fourteen Pauline epistles when the 𝔓32 codex was produced, rendering these the prime candidates.

This article argues that ‘the commandment’ in 1 Timothy 6.13–14 refers to almsgiving. This shows that verses 11–16 are not an intrusion into a discussion of the proper use of wealth, but an integral part of the author's argument in 6.6–19.