What!?!
What it reqires to be the sort of God that creates the universe and sets the conditions for the laws of physics that lead to the evolution of life is as about as comprehensible to us mere mortals as it is for an ant to understand the mind of Lionardo Davinci when he was painting the Mona Lisa.
Therefore whatever we think of as perfection in relation to a deity is so far away from what perfection really is that it's a pointless exercise and is totally baseless as an axiomatic argument for the existence of God.
Actually the line of argument in the OP looks more like an atheist piss take of an imagined argument for the existence of God than a geniune theistic person's reasoning for believing in God.
What I can see the perfection concept being used for is of a more relativistic nature, that beaing: Assuming God exists then...by a series of arguments and axiomatic assumptions...God must be a) single (i.e. no such thing as polytheisms) and b) perfect at least insofar as his relationship to the universe and human spirituality is concerned.
But you can't use the concept of perfection as a basis for demonstrating that God exists.
“The fundamental cause of the trouble is that in the modern world the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt.” - Bertrand Russell
"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, the world will know peace."
Jimi Hendrix
