Fair enough. As theology goes, it is not very sophisticated at all, but he is entitled to his beliefs.
I only wish, perhaps in vain, that he realizes that his argumentation is entirely aesthetical in nature. He should not expect anyone to perceive it as having some logical value - because it has none.
He is "entitled" to his beliefs as long as they are private, once he starts telling others what they should believe then he loses that entitlement and is required to support his beliefs ... he fails to do so and revels himself as an egotistical fraud with singularly primitive views.