Yes. Direct (and indirect) experience is one such way (and revelation from a Divine entity interacting with us may feed into that too, though we'll set that one aside here obviously.)
If my life is in shreds because of a lot of bad decisions on my own part or from others too (some would call this sin ... but I realize non-Christians are squeamish about that word -another thing so many of you think is non-existent, but my personal knowledge of it informs me otherwise), and I am given religious instructions about how (or to whom) I can look to get things turned around and live my life in a better way; the results of that lead to a certain kind of knowledge. Not everybody sees this as knowledge, obviously, since it has highly subjective elements. And we can be experts at fooling ourselves too (as I certainly shouldn't have to tell you as a professional scientist). But what you probably need to be reminded of is that this potential "fooling ourselves" doesn't always just work in one direction (towards some formal religious faith). It also works in the other direction too. There are those who have tasted and yet turned away (I gather you may be just such a person)? And your personal experience in that regard you probably regard as knowledge. Or even if you hold it to be subjective, you effectively live by it as if it were knowledge now, no? That is the same kind of knowledge and testimony that others have too that can't be denied or taken away from them just because some others turn away or seek different conclusions. That [personal experience] is one form of knowledge that transcends mere empiricism or Scientism.
Another is inter-personal knowledge. I know and trust my wife. That doesn't mean that we never surprise or disappoint each other. But there are things that I know [she loves me!] even if I can't give you a scientific treatise to demonstrate it. Yet I live day-to-day in the faith, hope, and conviction that it is true. We could probably go on to speak of beauty, aesthetics, or other things too --most or all of which (like love) end up dying with any attempted reductionistic analysis. There are all sorts of knowledge that I can't demonstrate to you with 100% empirical certainty, yet they function as knowledge for me just the same.
I note that you still seem to think I am joined with you in your black and white world where everything must be either regarded as 100% fact or 100% opinion. Until you can break out of that black-and-white outlook, we will continue to talk past each other on that. You effectively speak as if 0% and 100% are the only numbers that exist on that scale, and I'm here to keep reminding you: just ain't so. And I'm willing to call that my (non-scientific) knowledge of a fact!
Added edit: I said above "There are all sorts of knowledge that I can't demonstrate to you with 100% empirical certainty, yet they function as knowledge for me just the same. " Let me add to that here that the reason I trust this [you asked why] is 1. the world would turn into a real hell-hole if I or we all started to question some of these basic intuitions --things would quickly devolve into a hellish morass of Nietzschean brute contests of will and neither formal religions nor the highly-revered science would long remain in this world. And 2. because I believe (yes, believe) they are true! There is always the logical possibility that I am wrong. I'm willing to live with that. In fact, on the entire myriad of everything I do believe, it is nearly certain (just on probability alone) that I'm wrong on some things. I see how wrong geniuses can be about a lot of things, and I'm no genius.