“Not thinking that is typical Mormonism.”
It isn’t Mormonism at all!
Strong evidence with an overly modest conclusion is more persuasive than strong evidence with an equally strong conclusion. In the latter case the person corrected may be inclined to nit-pick to save face. For example, perhaps they would point out that it is possible the guy is Mormon despite these odd apostasies. Then one would have to get nit-picky back and point out that the apostasies themselves are certainly not Mormonism, and with such beliefs he is not a real Mormon even if he claims to be, and it doesn't say he even claimed to be....and so forth. But by instead making the understated more modest conclusion that it was not typical Mormonism, the correction is made without much room for argument. Its so hard to argue that somebody claiming to be a "Shen Lord" and a "god" is a typical Mormon that the person corrected has to change their thinking, and likely will conclude on their own that they were completely mistaken and indeed that it is no kind of Mormonism at all...the latter part being accepted more easily since no ego is involved in the extra steps.
Actually, Mormons believe that they will each be gods some day of their own universe. They and their wives will forever copulate to create and populate their own “earth”. Wasn’t Joseph Smith killed by a lynch mob for something similar to what this man did?