The spatio-temporal bounds of perception and thereupon and thenceforth of inference make the two invalid modes of cognition and of assertion insofar the dominion of matters such as god are concerned.
Whilst one might on the other hand employ the same limits to negate the presence, or of absence of divinity or such ideas mental or otherwise, the quandary in such is one of a non-sequitur if one may, for reasons stated above.
The validity or the lack thereof in such a matter as the dominion of supra-perception is concerned, thus, a source that contains and consists of supra-perceptive validity and values ought to be the source, whilst it could be debated; the epistemological stature and validity of such a canon particularly so when its practical workings in such dealings constitute the sphere of perception and/or inference which fall outside its own dominion.
The question however, on the view of perception itself, is the cognition's substratum being superimposed, tainted, or for the sake of allowance, shaded, by a priori observations or conceptual paradigms of categories.
This given, the question extends to the actual object that forms the subject of cognition at the superficial level of it; is it the particular identity that reaches the cognizer in one or more of its modes of cognition, the combination of one or more of these identities, or an extraneous substratum that forms the entity in its identified nature?
Now, if it were one or more of the peculiar identities that constitute the commonalities of a stock, how then does one call out an identification of an individual? Equally so, the case of the combination of such identities that still do not possess an unique stature to themselves, possibly, so far as the group of such individuals go?
As for the cognition of an entity, as an extraneous substratum if one may, what defines the validity of the cognition and of the mode? The apparatus forming the modes of the general cognition of perception and its descendant in certain cases, of inference, is constrained by its inability to cognize an entity that falls outside its bounds of cognitive abilities by virtue of inherent differences of ability between antithetical domains.
The entirety of such questions form the fundamental bedrock of the validity of sources of information, mundane and otherwise and to reject one over another would have to go through such rigour of the framework of validity before either is resorted to.