I don't see the inconsistency. If we go back to verse 11 God has created grasses and trees. If these were growing the light they must have been growing by must have been the light of our LORD. IOW, the progression of what was created first was at GOD's pleasure, not what we believe the progression must be.
I first stated: Even in vs. 3 that "light" isn't the sun. The sun wasn't formed until vs.14.
And you replied: I disagree. I believe the lights in the firmament of the heavens to divide the day from the night are stars. We see stars at night but not during the day.
To which, I replied: That would make more sense but it doesn't fit with 1:16: 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......Wouldn't that, on the fourth day, be the sun and moon, as well as stars?
And this brings us to your last statement: I don't see the inconsistency. If we go back to verse 11 God has created grasses and trees. If these were growing the light they must have been growing by must have been the light of our LORD. IOW, the progression of what was created first was at GOD's pleasure, not what we believe the progression must be.
I don't understand exactly what you are saying. On what "day" do you believe the sun and moon were brought into existence? (I agree that He decides when and what comes first, at His pleasure).