Now we know that the law is good, if one uses it legitimately. We realize that law is not enacted for the righteous, but for the lawless and rebellious, for the ungodly and sinful, for the unholy and profane, for killers of father or mother, for murderers, for the sexually immoral, for homosexuals, for slave traders and liars and perjurers, and for anyone else who is averse to sound teaching ...
Perhaps it is possible to have our cake and eat it too if there is anything to the idea that Timothy died c. 100 CE (which I need to look into). What if Marcion and the historical Timothy represent competing streams of where Christianity should go after Paul, with Timothy offering letters that were supposedly sent to him by Paul that advance Timothy's version of post-Pauline Christianity (church structure and doctrine) and oppose Marcion's (or that of nascent Gnosticism). In that scenario, 1 and 2 Timothy would indeed be more "orthodox" (i.e., closer to Paul) than Marcion's version of Christianity, given that Timothy had actually known Paul and had co-written some of his letters.
If Timothy had fooled even Marcion with Colossians, perhaps he tried to pass off 1 and 2 Timothy to counter him or Gnosticism at a later time. "Yeah man, Paul sent me some letters that deal with all that stuff" (and hence their acceptance as early as possibly Polycarp).