I disagree with you. Here's why:
*He strikes me as a dogmatic belligerent. You cannot "lovingly correct" a belligerent.
*We don't know this was the only incident of harassment. Likely, it was not.
*He had too many canned responses to the ladies' rebuffs. That suggests he's practiced at this. The look on his wife and kids' faces suggest familiarity with this scenario as well. They didn't looked shocked, or in agreement, they looked tired and embarrassed.
*He's born again and he's an addict. He wasn't raised to think this way. He chose it. Born again addicts are a special breed, you see this type of behavior with them a lot. It's basically a substitute for their addiction. It gives them a sense of control that their addiction used to give them.
*The company, any company is in business to make money. It's not their job to provide spiritual education, whether they call themselves christian or not. That's the job of spiritual leaders, in churches. I'd be curious to know what his actual spiritual leaders are saying to him. That's far more insightful.
*Corporations have legal person good now. You cannot malign or slander or misrepresent them without penalty any more than you can an actual human being. As an employee he acts as their agent. He represents them.