Total votes: 3
Forfeiture. Also I agree with him.
The very system of a debate calls for the instigator / pro to agree with the title of the debate, and the contender / con to disagree with the title of the debate. The title of the debate is, "The Earth is Round, Not Flat," and therefore, since Sunshineboy217 is instigator / pro, this means that he is the one arguing for the position that the earth is not flat. This means that since DPrek is contender / con, he is the one arguing for the position that the earth is flat. Both this website and the title of this debate make it very clear which position each person takes, and it was therefore invalid for DPrek to claim that he did not know which position he was taking until the debate started. That argument would have been valid if the title were something like, "Is The Earth Round, or Flat?" But it was not, the title came in the form of an assertion. Sunshineboy217 is being significantly more reasonable in every argument of this debate, whereas DPrek was not, and thus, I must give Sunshineboy217 my vote.
Con provided a list of differences between Christianity and Mormonism, and Pro ditched that entire list, and focused on the one thing they agree on. That's like radically changing every single element of the recipe for a cake except for one single element, and using that one similarity as a reason to believe that the cake you have baked is the same as the cake you would have baked had you just followed the instructions correctly. Pro provided no actual rebuttal to any of con's arguments, so there wasn't even much to respond to. When confronted with a possible contradiction in their own logic, pro simply avoids the situation, and doesn't say a word for the rest of the debate.
Overall, pro completely failed to show that Christianity can at all be synonymous with Mormonism, meanwhile con provided lots of reasons as to why Christianity is definitely not synonymous with Mormonism.