In fact, this reminds me that Jesus Himself exhibited just such a thing, having supernaturally-given knowledge of the woman-at-the-well's relationship history, including her then-current situation. And Jesus also had supernaturally-given knowledge of Nathan's experience at or under the fig tree. Neither instance was "prophetic" in the sense of seeing into the future, but both required a supernatural source for the knowledge. (And I am NOT suggesting we can be equal to Jesus, nor that Jesus is not divine – it is my understanding that Jesus, though God, set aside His rights and "abilities" as God, while on Earth, and operated as a human being [albeit perfect and without sin] empowered by the Holy Spirit.)

So, my "knowledge" of the carpenter's phone number would, in this "definition", fall under the category "word of knowledge". It would not be a "word of wisdom", as there was no "insight" or such given. Likewise, if I had been given MORE facts regarding him, that still would have been a "word of knowledge" (where the meaning would be "message of knowledge"). For example, if instead God had given me detailed knowledge of his relationship history (WITHOUT giving me insight into those relationships), that would have been an instance of a "word of knowledge" as well.

Thanks for that. I have since been able to consult my Strong's Concordance. If one accepts that the essential difference between "knowledge" and "wisdom" is that in the former one need not provide analysis or advice or direction, while in the latter one would, I think that helps (at least me) clarify the two. And I can agree that a "word of knowledge" can include more than "mere" individual "piece of knowledge" / "a single fact". But in essence it would be knowledge of a fact, or a set of facts, and it would be supernaturally given (meaning, not originating from human reason or intellect).

"Peter's dealing with Ananias and Sapphira is the only even potential example I can think of in the Scriptures of non-prophetic knowledge of an event."

Actually, there are at least several instances of such things in the Scriptures, though every other instance aside from Peter and Ananias & Sapphira, that I am aware of, is in the Old Testament. Some are merely implied, as is the case with Elisha's (or was it Elijah's?) being able to know what an enemy king thinks or even says, and thus to warn Israel or Judah of his plans.

I think simple logic and discernment would be sufficient to enable one to "grasp the teachings of the Apostles", even when those teachings were "new". Satan, of course, blinds the minds of those who are without God, so to the extent that God Himself needs to work in a person's heart and mind, EVERYONE needs "supernatural" help to understand and acknowledge the Gospel. But on an "intellectual" level, what the Apostles taught about Jesus and the Gospel did not, and does not, need a "special gifting" to understand or grasp.

Yes, it would clarify things. But because God did not CLEARLY (is there a way to use italics or bold?) state that those gifts would cease, and because God chose to include in the Bible detailed descriptions of their operation, I contend that they are still given. (Bearing in mind that I disavow their practice as typically exemplified by TV preachers and congregations, and most if not all "Pentecostal" or "Charismatic" groups.)

Actually, the word "gift" is not used nearly as much in the text as we use it in our descriptions of the "spiritual gifts". The word used is "logos", which is a very generic term that can mean any form of verbal communication and frequently means discussion.

Again, for "knowledge" we find "gnosis" which has a basic, normal definition of "comprehension or intellectual grasp of something; the content of what is known" (BDAG).

It is also anarthrous (without an article), which means it is not a specific piece of knowledge, but a general speaking of knowledge. (This is also the only place the phrase is used in the Scriptures.)

So a valid translation of the phrase could be "and to another a message of what is comprehended." In fact, many translations read "message of knowledge".

Also, we have to understand that the gifts mentioned in this section (1 Corinthians 12:8-10) is a representative list of different manifestations of the Spirit, not necessarily a specific listing of specific gifts for specific people.

You ask: "What specific "gift" was in operation when Agabus proclaimed that there would be a famine in Judea?"

Since Agabus was specifically referred to as a prophet (Acts 21:10-11), I concur that this was prophecy. Predictive prophecy obviously requires "knowledge" of a future event, so that doesn't add any more than your counter-fact that teaching requires knowledge.

Peter's dealing with Ananias and Sapphira is the only even potential example I can think of in the Scriptures of non-prophetic knowledge of an event.

You ask: "What specific "gift" was in operation when Agabus proclaimed that there would be a famine in Judea?"

Since Agabus was specifically referred to as a prophet (Acts 11:27-28), I concur that this was prophecy. Predictive prophecy obviously requires "knowledge" of a future event, so that doesn't add any more than your counter-fact that teaching requires knowledge.

Peter's dealing with Ananias and Sapphira is the only even potential example I can think of in the Scriptures of non-prophetic knowledge of an event.