there is nothing that god in Genesis 2 does to say that he is unperfect. He is simply on earth in a limited form and is not acting as an omniscient being.
Of course there is, in fact the earlier God as found in Genesis 2 as opposed to the newer portrayal as found in Genesis 1, is something of a duffus. He neglects to make a female of the species for man even though he did so for all the others, he is clueless as to what would make a help meet for Adam and so brings in a bunch of different critters (Adam was not too happy with the Tiger but thought the sheep were REAL close) and is a far different representation than what we see in the much later God of Genesis 1.
And of course you can find examples of a "perfect" God in the Bible, I already pointed out that the God of Genesis 1 is close.
by the way I take offense from the calling of the bible as a myth, so can you at least try to appeal to the fact that people actually believe in it.
Tough. I did not call the Bible a myth, I called the Creation stories Myths, because that is what they are. They are a compilation (particularly the myth beginning in Genesis 2:5) written by different people from different cultures with different purposes.
Many of us believe in the Bible. I believe in the Bible. That has nothing to do with the fact that much of it is myth.
Aslan is not a
Tame Lion
™ Version 4.2