Hebrews 9:4 implies that the golden altar was in the holy of holies when obviously it was not. In view of Leviticus 16, is not ‘golden censer’ the correct translation?

This text is from an article written by David Gooding in 1987.

Exodus 30:6–8 makes it clear that the golden altar of incense stood in the Holy Place immediately outside the veil. Nonetheless, 1 Kings 6:22 describes it as the 'altar that belonged to the oracle' (or innermost shrine). It is so described because, in its function, it was directly related to the Most Holy Place.

When the priests burned incense on this altar and offered prayers on behalf of the people (see Luke 1:9–11), they could not enter the holiest: the veil had to come between them and the presence of God. But as they stood at the altar, offering incense, they stood facing the ark and directed their prayers to the God who presenced himself between the cherubim above the mercy seat in the Most Holy Place. In function, then, the altar of incense 'belonged to' the holy of holies. It was the place where the priest stood to supplicate the throne which stood behind the veil, in the holiest of all.

Now, the writer to the Hebrews is a very precise writer. He does not say nor imply that the golden altar stood inside the holy of holies. He says that the holy of holies had a golden altar and the ark. That does not imply that both were in the holy of holies.

Forgive a crude analogy. It would be true to say that my house has both a dining table and a dustbin (alias, trash can). That does not mean both these articles stand inside the house. The dining table is inside, of course, but the dustbin stands outside the back door; as close to the back door as it can, because in its function it is closely related to what goes on inside the kitchen.

The right translation in Hebrews 9:4, therefore, is not 'golden censer', but 'golden altar of incense'.