Wow so much back and forth over a few simple issues.
Look the overwhelming theme is that is being argued about Jesus is whether believing in his existence and believing in his existence aswell as everything else that is said about him in scripture is just still believing in him.
The difference being argued is the degree of belief, if you don't believe some things about a person than do you believe in a different person to the one that believes in everything? I'll leave that to each persons decision.
Another one I saw was about the nature of proving the existence of God and how that relates to faith. Meh, I used to need faith to believe in God but my observation of the gifts of the spirit and the healing/prophecy he has made me a part of mean I don't need that anymore, I simply know he exists. Moreover there is physical science to back him up. Faith is still in place, not as to the nature but the extent of God, I must always go out on a limb when prophecying or healing, I must always have faith, so it shall remain that way until the day I die.
The last was of whether or not Mormons and JW come under the Christian banner... no. There beliefs are simply too different. I'm sorry but its just that simple, at some point you just have to look at a belief system and recognise that it has differentiated too broadly from its origins. Where do we draw the line between something being Christian and Not Christian? I don't know, but its far further back that JW or Mormons that much I will say, until I find a belief system that is somewhere in the grey area, then that definition will suffice for now. You don't have to worry about where you draw the line if something has clearly gone far beyond the entire area where that line could be.
So no, I don't think JW or Mormons are Christian, they are nice and close, they are good people. But I will not defile my religion by including such blasphemy within its definition. Does make it easier to convert them cause they are already nice and close to the truth anyway though.