Of course, it used to be maintained that God was deceiving us by pointing to the rocks--suggesting that they are obviously older than 6000 years. Trouble is, now we know better. We know rocks can be formed in a short space of time if the conditions are right. So, if we accept Poythress' premise about distance of the stars and light travel and such, perhaps we can also cut God some slack and conclude that we may just learn something in the future that would make us revise such conclusions. Remember that in the Victorian Era there were many who concluded Moses couldn't have written the Pentateuch because there were no alphabets in his time. A few short years later we found out that there were alphabets predating Moses hundreds of years.

It always seems to me that the problem with those who don't accept 6 day creation is faith. "Hath God really said." I am supposed to believe every part of Bible as it is presented, like the resurrection, but not the straightforward presentation of how God made the world. And, actually, the problem isn't days since a fiat creation is indicated.

I love my brothers who do not believe in the straightforward presentation of the creation. I think consistency in how they approach the rest of scripture will win them over.