This answer comes from the perspective of the Christian philosophy and theology of Emanuel Swedenborg (1688–1772).
Key point: The false premise is #2. God made humans for the purpose of ruling over His creation. This also falsifies premise #4.
Scripture does not say that God's purpose in creating humans is for them to rule over God's creation.
The idea that God created humans for the purpose of ruling over his creation is based especially on Bible passages such as:
So God created humankind in his image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them. God blessed them, and God said to them, "Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth and subdue it; and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the air and over every living thing that moves upon the earth." (Genesis 1:27–28, NRSV, emphasis added)
What are human beings that you are mindful of them,
mortals that you care for them?
Yet you have made them a little lower than God,
and crowned them with glory and honor.
You have given them dominion over the works of your hands;
you have put all things under their feet.
(Psalm 8:4-6, NRSV)
However, neither of these passages states that ruling over God's creation is God's purpose in creating humans. They simply state that giving humans dominion over the remainder of creation is something God has done. It could just as well be said that God's purpose in creating humans is for them to "be fruitful and multiply," or to be "a little lower than God, and crowned with glory and honor"–which God is also said in these passages to do for human beings.
In short, what God does for humans is not necessarily God's purpose in creating humans.
Scripture suggests that God's purpose in creating humans is to be in relationship with them.
Taking any one or a few verses from Scripture in isolation and using them as the basis for major conclusions about God's actions and God's purposes is a fundamentally faulty way of reading Scripture. Especially considering that much of Scripture consists, not of philosophy and theology, but of a narrative, a better approach would be to look at the overall themes of Scripture for clues as to why God created humans.
And a key theme of Scripture overall is the concept of "covenant." In fact, this concept is so central to Scripture that Christians have actually named the two major divisions of their scriptures after the covenant between God and humanity: "The Old Testament" and "The New Testament." "Testament" is another word for "covenant."
Now, a covenant is a relationship between two parties–in this case, God and humanity. And if we follow the biblical narrative, we see that God is continually making and renewing covenants with humanity. For example (emphasis added in all cases):
God made a covenant with Noah:
I will establish my covenant with you; and you shall come into the ark, you, your sons, your wife, and your sons' wives with you. (Genesis 6:18)
God made a covenant with Abram/Abraham:
On that day the Lord made a covenant with Abram, saying, "To your descendants I give this land, from the river of Egypt to the great river, the river Euphrates, the land of the Kenites, the Kenizzites, the Kadmonites, the Hittites, the Perizzites, the Rephaim, the Amorites, the Canaanites, the Girgashites, and the Jebusites." (Genesis 15:18–21)
God made a covenant with the Israelite nation:
Moses came and told the people all the words of the Lord and all the ordinances; and all the people answered with one voice, and said, "All the words that the Lord has spoken we will do." And Moses wrote down all the words of the Lord. He rose early in the morning, and built an altar at the foot of the mountain, and set up twelve pillars, corresponding to the twelve tribes of Israel. He sent young men of the people of Israel, who offered burnt offerings and sacrificed oxen as offerings of well-being to the Lord. Moses took half of the blood and put it in basins, and half of the blood he dashed against the altar. Then he took the book of the covenant, and read it in the hearing of the people; and they said, "All that the Lord has spoken we will do, and we will be obedient." Moses took the blood and dashed it on the people, and said, "See the blood of the covenant that the Lord has made with you in accordance with all these words." (Exodus 24:3–8)
And in the New Testament, Jesus, who is viewed by Christians as "God with us" (Matthew 1:23), renewed that blood covenant in symbolic fashion:
When the hour came, he took his place at the table, and the apostles with him. He said to them, "I have eagerly desired to eat this Passover with you before I suffer; for I tell you, I will not eat it until it is fulfilled in the kingdom of God." Then he took a cup, and after giving thanks he said, "Take this and divide it among yourselves; for I tell you that from now on I will not drink of the fruit of the vine until the kingdom of God comes." Then he took a loaf of bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and gave it to them, saying, "This is my body, which is given for you. Do this in remembrance of me." And he did the same with the cup after supper, saying, "This cup that is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood." (Luke 22:14–20)
These are just a few of many, many passages in the Christian Bible regarding the ongoing theme of the covenant between God and humanity.
This overarching theme of Scripture strongly suggests that in Christian philosophy and theology God's primary purpose in creating humans is not to give them dominion, but rather to establish a covenantal relationship with them.
Relationship is God's purpose in creating humanity.
Swedenborg picks up this theme of relationship as God's purpose in creating humanity in the most philosophical of his theological works, Divine Love and Wisdom:
Divine love and wisdom cannot fail to be and to be manifested in others that it has created. The hallmark of love is not loving ourselves but loving others and being united to them through love. The hallmark of love is also being loved by others because this is how we are united. Truly, the essence of all love is to be found in union, in the life of love that we call joy, delight, pleasure, sweetness, blessedness, contentment, and happiness.
The essence of love is that what is ours should belong to someone else. Feeling the joy of someone else as joy within ourselves—that is loving. . . .
Can anyone fail to see this who looks into the essential nature of love? What is loving ourselves alone, really, and not loving someone else who loves us in return? This is more fragmentation than union. Love's union depends on mutuality, and there is no mutuality within ourselves alone. If we think there is, it is because we are imagining some mutuality in others.
We can see from this that divine love cannot fail to be and to be manifested in others whom it loves and who love it. If this is characteristic of all love, it must be supremely characteristic, infinitely characteristic, of love itself.
In regard to God, loving and being loved in return are not possible in the case of others who have some share of infinity or anything of the essence and life of intrinsic love or of Divinity. If there were within them any share of infinity or anything of the essence and life of intrinsic love—of Divinity, that is—it would not be others who would be loving God. He would be loving himself. What is infinite or divine is unique. If it were in others, it would still be itself; and it would be pure love for itself, of which there cannot be the slightest trace in God. This is absolutely opposite to the divine essence. For love to be mutual, then, it needs to be a love for others in whom there is nothing of intrinsic Divinity; and we will see below [55, 305] that it is a love for others who were created by Divinity. (Divine Love and Wisdom #47–49, emphasis in the original)
What Swedenborg is saying here, in brief, is that the nature of love itself, and especially of divine love, is that it must have others to love, and that love must be mutual, and that it was therefore necessary for God to create finite (non-God) beings whom God could love, and who could love God in return.
Another way Swedenborg formulates this, much more briefly, is found in Divine Providence, which forms a sequel to Divine Love and Wisdom:
The ultimate purpose of creation is a heaven from the human race. (Divine Providence #324)
Heaven, in Swedenborg's conception of it, consists of people who have freely chosen to be in mutual, loving relationship with God and with one another. This is in line with Jesus' pithy distillation of the entire Scriptures into the two Great Commandments:
One of them, an expert in the law, tested him with this question: "Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?"
Jesus replied: "'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.' This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.' All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments." (Matthew 22:35–40)
From the perspective of the Christian philosophy of Emanuel Swedenborg, then, God's purpose in creating humans is to have beings with whom God can be in a freely chosen and mutual loving relationship.
God's purpose in creating humans requires humans to have the ability to reject that relationship.
Finally, to take up the issue of whether or not God created humans "perfectly":
Obviously there is much evil and imperfection in human life, both individually and collectively. The issue of God's perfection, and perfect love, in the face of the existence of evil in God's creation, and particularly in the human element of God's creation, is a vast subject both in philosophy and theology, covered generally under the term "theodicy." Though we cannot fully cover such a vast topic here, the basics, from the perspective of Swedenborg's philosophy, are these:
For a relationship to be truly loving and mutual, it must be freely chosen. If humans were created so that we could do nothing but love God (and one another), we would be mere robots, or mere extensions of God. Our love would be no more real or mutual than that of a computer programmed to display "I love you" on its screen.
For humans to be able to freely and mutually return God's love, then, we must also have the ability to reject God's love, and refuse a mutual, loving relationship with God.
And yet, if everything good is from God, and is God, as Swedenborg's philosophy states, then rejecting God also means rejecting what is good. And rejecting what is good means opting for evil over good.
Therefore in order to fulfill God's purpose of creating a human race with which God could be in mutual, loving relationship, God had to create humans with the ability to reject God, love, and goodness. God therefore had to create humans with the ability to choose, "create," and perpetrate evil instead of good.
This means that the existence of evil in human life and society is not an imperfection in God's creation. Rather, it was necessary for God to allow for it (not create it) in order for God to achieve God's primary purpose in creation of being in mutual, loving relationship with beings other than God's own self.
Based on the above reasoning:
Premise #2, "God made humans for the purpose of ruling over His creation," is false.
Premise #4, "Humans are not perfectly suited toward their purpose," is also false.
According to the Christian philosophy of Emanuel Swedenborg, humans are created perfectly by God to accomplish God's purpose for them. That perfection, however, requires human to have moral and spiritual freedom, so that we can reject God's goodness, and choose evil instead.
The fact that we humans are capable of rejecting God's purpose for us is essential to our very humanity, and to our ability to freely choose to fulfill God's purpose for us, which is to be in a mutually loving relationship with God and with our fellow human beings.