And Moses said, “They were consumed because the sin offering had not been eaten”: This quotation is not found anywhere else in Scripture, but it seems to have something to do with the account in Lev 10.16-20, where the sacrifice involved is the sin offering, not the burnt offering of Lev 9.24 and 2~Chr 7.1. Perhaps the text is defective here, as Goldstein believes. Perhaps it has something to do with a point in Jewish law which has been forgotten, as Bartlett seems to think. There is no solution at hand for the problem of what this means and how it fits into the context. Revised Standard Version‘s translation is possible, but the approach taken by Good News Bible is preferable; it takes the sin offering as the subject of the verb consumed, saying “the sin offering was consumed by fire.” New English Bible inserts “in the same way” in order to help the reader see a connection with the context. This is helpful. Although Lev 10.16 does not explicitly say that the sin offering caught fire miraculously, it can be understood that way. We would then have two instances in Moses’ life where an offering suddenly caught flame. The letter writer, who in verse 10 refers to the incident in Lev 9.24, remembers the Lev 10 incident. So then in verse 11 he has Moses explain it. Sin offering may be rendered “offering to seek God’s forgiveness for sin” (for a description of this offering see Lev 4.1–5.13). We suggest following New English Bible by placing this verse in parentheses. Alternative models that use indirect discourse for it are:

• (Moses had explained that the sin offering [or, the offering to seek God’s forgiveness for sin] caught fire just like this, because it had not been eaten.)

• (Moses had explained that the fire burned the sin offering just like this, because Aaron’s sons had not eaten it [or, the animal]).

Quoted with permission from Bullard, Roger A. and Hatton, Howard A. A Handbook on 1-2 Maccabees. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2011. For this and other handbooks for translators see here.