As I mentioned before on here, religions created in the past 2000 years have always tried to include Jesus or explain Jesus in their beleif system. What I further realize, though, is that they try to deny the divinity of Jesus in some way. The Muslims believe Jesus was a prophet... but not the son of God. The Mormons believe that Jesus died for our sins, but is seperate from God the father. The Jehovah's Witness believe Jesus was/is an archangel and God's first creation. In each of these groups, their own book of scripture has come about (Koran, Book of Mormon, NWT of the Bible) in response to the beliefs their creators espoused and used as evidence for why they believe these things.
I think a religion collapses under its own weight when it tries to "ride the coat tails" of Christianity, specifically the message of Jesus, while at the same time trying to deny its beliefs or His identity/divinity in Christian canon. It would be like me trying to say "yeah I believe in Mohammed the prophet, but he was actually just a personification of a larger group of people and didn't actually prophecy but simply made suggestions on how to live," and then write up my own "holy book" to support my claims. Oh, and then to just say God told me so anyone who disagrees can be accused of disagreeing with God.
One point made in the podcast was that many say (referring to JW, but could easily apply to other faith systems) "ours is the first real/true/complete translation or interpretation of scripture." It's ludicrous to think that given the level of study done on the Bible (and apocrypha) over 2000 years would yield no true insights about God. Especially when the ones making those claims add their own stuff, or take out what doesn't conform to what they want to believe.