Your arguments are reasonable, but are littered with ignorance fallacies. Just because you can’t think of how sometime could happen is not evidence that it cannot. Also, you present sufficient conditions but treat them as necessary.
I partly agree. I guess it depends on whether we are opening the discussion up to physical phenomenon that we haven't observed anywhere else in the universe. That is possible but I think, and you may disagree, that the burden of proof to provide evidence of that phenomenon then falls on the one proposing it. Otherwise my theory of lunar glow worms is just as valid as any other and I don't accept that. I know you don't accept that either because you have admitted that some things have already been definitively demonstrated, which would be impossible in a worldview where an explanation could be valid just by the mere act of proposing it.
So far you appear to have agreed that on a flat Earth:
1. The moon doesn't emit it's own light.
2. The sun can't be illuminating the moon.
3. Starlight can't be illuminating the moon.
But perhaps you disagree with this?
1. To illuminate the full face of the moon on a flat Earth, the source of the light must be between the observer and the moon.
I can only conclude that that is what you disagree with because it is clear that there is no such source of light visible to the observer. However, if you agree with this, then I think the burden of proof falls on you to propose a source of light that is not visible to an observer below, that illuminates an object above, and does not block the view of other stars. Because I don't believe there is an existing physical phenomenon that can explain this.
One last point, I am assuming that the moon is close in accordance with most flat Earth models, as in thousands of miles away rather than hundreds of thousands of miles away. This can be challenged but I believe it opens up FET to more serious issues and is worthy of a separate discussion. I'm happy to accept that one explanation is that the moon is a distant object and the light source is not visible on the other side of the flat Earth but I'm hoping we can restrict this particular debate to the more common flat Earth/close moon theory. Or you can rule out a distant moon on a flat Earth right away if you choose, there's many different ways to do it
Nice job on identifying dispersion as the evidence. You even used the correct word.
Thanks