if something that is not a body is in a direction, in the sense of being above the world, the question is whether it occupies one spatial region or two—“spatial region” being understood in its technical sense. They maintain that it does not occupy a spatial region in the technical sense, while being above the world and in a direction, namely, the upward direction.

The second response is to say: Your statement, “in one spatial region or in more than one,” entails a multiplicity of spatial regions, which is not conceded. For spatial regions must either be existent or nonexistent. They are not existent, as you have established in this argument and elsewhere. If they are nonexistent, then sheer nonexistence does not admit of multiplicity, nor can it be described as either one or two. It is therefore untenable to say that He must be either in one spatial region or in two.

This is reinforced by the third response: a spatial region must be either existent or nonexistent. If it is existent, He could necessarily be associated with something existent, just as He is associated with the attributes that necessarily belong to Him