radiction, and that God cannot violate the law of contradiction.La Croix explains that God does not bring about state of affairs by choosing from a list of alternatives and then choosing one of the possibilities. Rather, He creates them ex nihilo. The eternal truths, including the laws of logic, depend on Gods will in the sense that God freely creates them and determines their nature. However, when God creates these eternal truths, He also freely chooses to put into effect certain conditions upon other exercises of His will. So when God creates the laws of logic, He cannot change or violate them, for in creating them He freely chooses to subject Himself to the rules that are a consequence of them being in existence. We see here then that God creates the eternal truths but this does not entail that He can do what is logically impossibleindeed in creating them He made it so that He cannot. And so Frankfurts argument that Descartes is committed to God being able to do the logically possible because He creates the eternal truths is refuted. La Croixs position has the benefit of accommodating a view of a God who is ultimately powerful who alone has wholly independent existence. It also rids Descartes view of the apparent difficulty presented by Frankfurt that Gods omnipotence is incoherent. On La Croixs reading, Gods power is not unlimited, but it is significant that the limitations on His power are of His own doing. The eternal truths, including the laws of logic, do not pre-exist God, and so God is the only one on whom nothing at all depends. Further, the eternal truths are truly necessary, since they in fact cannot be otherwise, because they cannot be changed or violated. However, there are some troubling consequences of La Croixs view. It seems to be an extreme limitation on Gods perfection and power to be unable to alter the truths that He has created. It would mean that He at one time had the capacity to determine the character of the ...
