your position is greater, even though you yourself do not regard this as proof.

As for your statement, “The second alternative is that one side differs from the other in reality and essence. We say that this is impossible for several reasons. First, this entails that His essence is composite, which is false, as we have explained,” you may be told in reply: The argument from composition has already been refuted in a manner that makes its invalidity evident to every discerning, rational person.

Then there is your second point: “We have explained that something occupying space means nothing other than something extended in directions corresponding to spatial regions. We have also explained that magnitude cannot be an attribute but must be an entity in its own right, and that, whenever this is so, all things occupying space are alike. That being so, it is impossible to maintain that one side of that thing differs from the side