ar to be periods of extraordinary happenings which fit ?a long time? definition better than a 24-hour definition. What about Ryrie?s argument that the word ?day? in conjunction with a numerical adjective means a solar day? The theologian J. Oliver Buswell answered that question as he replied to another author trying to use a similar line of reasoning, ?It may be true that this is the only case in which the word day is used figuratively when preceded by any numeral, but the reason is that this is the only case in Scripture in which any indefinitely long periods of time are enumerated. The words ?aion? in Greek and ?olam? in Hebrew are literal words for ?age,? but we do not happen to have any case in which God has said ?first age,? ?second age,? ?third age,? etc. The attempt to make a grammatical rule to the effect that the numeral preceding the word day makes it literal, breaks down on the simple fact that this is the only case in all the Scriptures, and in all Hebrew language, I think, in which ages are enumerated one after the other. There is no such rule in anybody?s Hebrew grammar anywhere. The author of this objection, or the one from whom he has attempted to quote, has simply put forth with a sound of authority a grammatical rule which does not exist?. (7)Days Without Sun And God said, ?Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days and years? And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night; He made the stars also. And the evening and the morning were the fourth day (Gen. 1:14,16,19). On the first day God created light, yet the sun, moon, and stars were not visible until the fourth day. Some liberal scholars might (I do not believe this at all) say there is no problem to a creation taking roughly 12 billion years to unfold. It would be some 7-10 billion years after the inception, ...
