If you do a word search in the King James Version of the Bible, you will find the phrase " six hundred threescore and six" twice; once in 1Kings 10:1 and once in Rev 13:18.

The first refers to "the weight of gold that came to Solomon in one year" as being "six hundred threescore and six talents of gold". In the second, we are told that to "count the number of the beast" which is also the number of a man, and this number is "Six hundred threescore and six". The number "666", written as such, appears nowhere in the book.

Magic Squares

Outside of these Bible references, the number 666 is connected with the so-called Magic Squares, associated with Cornelius Agrippa (1486-1535). The squares correspond to the numbers from 3 to nine, and are tied to the 7 classical planets, which include the sun and the moon. Each square is composed of rows and columns, 3x3, 4x4 etc, made up of positive integers. The Square of Saturn shows the first nine numbers arrranged in three rows and three coulmns so that each row and column add to the same sum, while the Square of Jupiter uses the first 16 numbers, and so on.

If you are familar with the Kabbalah and the Tree of Life, you may recall that each of the spheres (sephera) on the tree (except Kether, the Crown) are associated with a celestial body as well as a number. The numbers follow the order of the legendary path of the soul in it's descent through the planetary spheres, from the zodiac (2) to Saturn (3), Jupiter (4), Mars (5), the Sun (6), Venus (7), Mercury (8), the Moon (9) and the earth (10). These are the same numbers for the magical squares, and if you look at the astrological symbol for each of these, you will see that they look like the number associated with them. In other words, the Tree of Life and the Magic Squares and Astrology are intimately tied to one another.

The Square of the Sun

The middle sphere on the Tree of Life is associated with the number 6 and the sun; the Square of the Sun features the first 36 integers in 6 rows and columns, and the total of these 36 numbers is 666. This number is closely tied in numerology to the sun. See John Michell's "City of Revelation" and "New View over Atlantis" or David Fideler's "Jesus Christ - Sun of God".


Before you go much further, I recommend that you read up on King James, and his connections to Masonry. He was James VI of Scotland before becoming James I of England. If you are up for it, you can also look into claims that James was bi-sexual. You will also want to read up on Sir Francis Bacon, who had a hand in compiling the KJV (King James Version of the Bible). Note especially his connections to Masonry and Rosicrucianism. People who want to cling to the notion that the modern Bible is the undisputed "word of God' on one hand, while bashing Masons on the other hand, may want to re-think their positions in light of the fact that the KJV is a Masonic work full of Kabbalistic notions introduced by Bacon and others involved in the Bible "making" process.

While the Tree of Life is composed of 10 spheres connected by 22 paths, Psalm 119 is composed of 22 verses, each one headed by a different Hebrew letter, there are 22 Tarot Trump Cards, and the Revelation, like I Kings, is composed of 22 Chapters. The patriarch Enoch is connected to the sun by the fact that he is said (in Genesis) to have lived 365 years. Solomon appears to being connected to the sun as well by this notion of "six hundred threescore and six talents of gold"; with gold being a oft used code for the sun and royalty.

Jacob and his 12 sons, as well as Moses and the 12 tribes are well known allegorical symbols for the sun and the zodiac system. The number seven in the Revelation relates to the 7 classical planets as well as the 7 Kundalini Chakras (churches). The opening of the seven seals is an apt description of a Kundalini experience. Kundalini symbolism centers around the spine and the 7 ductless endrocrine glands that effect human consciousness. In Rev 4, we read of "one" on the throne, surrounded by 24 seated elders, which corresponds to the 12 sets of cranial nerves that come together to form the spinal column.

Jesus and 12 disciples is another astrological allegory. In Rev 1 we see "in the midst of the seven candlesticks one like unto the Son of man... and his countenance was as the sun shineth in his strength". Again the seven candlesticks (like a Menorah) are the seven classical planets.

Be that as it may, some people have grasped onto this number 666, and made it into a symbol for all that is evil, rather than a symbol of our Sun and the Son, and they attempt to see it almost everywhere. Personally, I find it difficult to believe that any number or geometric figure can be inherently evil.

The Capitol Building - Lot 666?

You may know that when Washington DC was in the early planning stages, L'Enfant the designer, got in trouble because he was not forthcoming in his production of a version of the map that included numbered lots the the commissioners could use to entice buyers, since they were in need of money to pay for the work that was being done. Eventually Ellicott replaced L'Enfant and with the help of his Brother Benjamin, was able to produce a map with lot numbers in about three weeks time.

[Some people have claimed that a man named Benjamin Banneker is the one who reproduced L'Enfant's maps purely from memory, thereby "saving the day" when L'Enfant was fired and took his copy with him. Unfortunatley, Banneker, who had been hired temporarily to help Ellicott establish meridian lines astronomically left the job in April of 1791, long before L'E. did in 1792. Banneker has been confused with Ellicott's brother, also name Benjamin.]

Remember that the reason for numbering lots was to be able to sell those; so although buildings have been positioned where there were at one time numbered lots, there was no need to number plazas or places where buildings were to be placed, such as the White House and the Capitol Building.

In spite of this, we see on the net, that those dog-gone satanist Masons placed "our" Capitol Building on lot number 666. See for your self; on this web page, which features the ubiquitous one opening paragraph followed by a lengthy cut and paste from another source, instead of a link to that source, we read, "The city of Washington, D.C. was built under the guidance of the Columbian faction of Weishaupt's Illuminati... The U.S. Capitol, built upon Lot 666, is shaped into the Goat of Baphomet and sits atop a truncated pyramid".

This is an image taken from Ellicott's map featuring the lot numbers. As you can tell the lots were numbered in double columns; 573, 574, 575, 576, 577, then 633, 634, 635, then 685, 686, 687, 688, and then 725, 726, 727, etc. Lot 666 is nowhere near there, and the Capitol is Not on a numbered lot? Go figure.

If you look at the extreme southern end of the DC map you can see lots 661, 62, 63 64 and 65. Lot 666 appears to be a small triangle that is not numbered on the map.

This one from "The UFO Congress" is much better:

Jim Marrs is author of "Crossfire: The Plot That Killed Kennedy" and has taught a course on that assassination at the University of Texas since 1976. I worked in mass media. The mass media are dumb, lazy, and wonít go dig into a story. He said the US capitol sits on lot 666 in Washington, DC. He closed by saying that the ruling elite are trying to contact our ancient creators, have contacted them, or are the ancient creators.

So he says that the mass media members are lazy and won't dig into a story, but he states categorically that the Capitol is on lot 666 ( a fact that can be proven wrong by doing a little digging), AND the ruling elite either have contacted or are trying to contact the aliens who created us, or perhaps they are Them. So much for that guys credibiltiy.

The Washington Monument - 666 feet tall?

If you Google for "washington monument" height , the first listing you see is for a page about the monument at greatbuildings.com . Note that the page mentions that the monument has a base of 55 feet and a height of 555 feet, in keeping with what they call the "standard Egyptian proportion of 10:1 height to base". If you continue your search, you will see that the actual height is 555.5 feet.

Googling for "washington monument" foundation depth we see several sites that bear the figure 36 feet 10 inches. 555 + 36 is 591, so how is it that so many people claim that the monument is 666 feet tall? Well first of all, 555 feet is 6660 inches, and as we know, many people just can't keep fact straight.

Consider this from http://www.geocities.com/baja/5692/:

"The Washington Monument is 555 feet in visible height (6,660 inches). However tourist guides to the obelisk tell us that 20% of its overall height forms part of the foundations in order to stabilise the monument. Thus the true height of the obelisk is 666 feet, accurately reflecting the accursed number of the forthcoming antichrist leader of the New World Order, Lucifer."

So tourist guides were telling the story about a 20% foundation, and it has been picked up from there?

Looking back at the site dedicated to the Monument History that was mentioned earlier, we see that the location of the monument was relocated "because of the swamplike nature of the ground at the planned cross-axis of the White House and the U. S. Capitol". Speaking of the new location, the author writes:

"The blocks were set in a mixture of lime mortar and cement to form a stepped-up truncated pyramid 80 feet square at the base. The foundation extended 7 feet, 8 inches below ground, and 15 feet, 8 inches above. [2] However, it proved to be incapable of supporting the projected height and weight of the monument and was later modified when the project was completed by the Army engineers."

You will recall that the original position chosen by L'Enfant, was still located under water as late as 1820, so it would be an understatement to describe it as being "swamp-like" in the 1840's. If the original position was too swampy, how do you imagine that you could dig down 111 feet, just 120 yards away? Imagine digging a pit 111x80 feet in the 1840's. Any way, we know that the foundation was not 20% of 555 feet but is 36'10".

Given that we now have had search capabilities at our finger tips for years now, it is amazing to me that people continue to write this kind of stuff, and that more people don't call them on it. Consider the following, posted on Wednesday, February 11, 2004:

"I was watching techtv and this show Conspiracies comes on. Well it seems that Washington D.C. our capital is designed to worship some Masonic cult or something ... So here is some of the info that just caught my eye ... They say the monument is 555 ft. tall and in most cases when you build an obelisk like that you put 20% of the structure in the ground. Well if you take 20% of 555 ft. you get 111 ft. add those together and you get 666.

So I did some looking and the second link I goggled as Washington Monument was this one. Ok so dig this turns out the monument is only 550 ft. tall. So that would be 660 not 666. So now we know how far this guy went out on a limb."

Yikes! This guy can't get it right, even with the facts right at hand. I imagine what he saw, but read incorrectly was 6660 inches,

Now we can see where the logic about "20% of the structure in the ground" comes from. The idea is that in 'most cases' when you build an obelisk you put 20% in the ground- in order to stablize it, which makes a certain kind of sense.

The problem is that Egyptians did not bury their obelisks, they stood them on their base.

On page 5 of "The Magic of Obelisks", Peter Tompkins tells us that, "Somehow, the Egyptians had developed a means of placing these huge blocks of granite (meaning the obelisks) directly onto a cubical pedastal which had to be absolutely level in order to have the apex of the obelisk truly vertical over it's base - no easy task". What this means is that the obelisk was 'balanced' on it's base with no other means of support, which made it easier for others, like the Romans to remove them.

And remove them they did. Augustus, Caligula and Constantine all had obelisks moved from Egypt during their reigns. Here is a review of existing obelisks in and out of Egypt. Out of 30, only 7 obelisks are still remaining in Egypt, while 13 are in Rome, Italy; others are in New York, Paris and London, moved there with Masonic financing.

Tompkins points out that either because they could not match the skill of the Egyptian engineers or because the obelisks had been damaged at the base, the Romans developed a system of wedging metal footings between the obelisk base and the pedastal. The image below shows what is called "Cleopatra's Needle" which is located in New York City, and which features "crabs" on the four corners to support it.

The crabs were each about 16 inches in diameter made with shanks that fit into the obelisk and down into the pedastal. Molten lead was poured around the crabs to secure them in place. Romans called them crabs as that animal was considered a symbol of Apollo, their sun god; the obelisk being a solar monument. [To repeat; the obelisks were not buried in the ground, but were balanced on their base.]

Perhaps the most famous relocated obelisk is in the middle of St Peter's Square at the Vatican in Rome. As you can see, the pedastal that it rests on is composed of three blocks of stone; the base of the obelisk itself is 27 feet in the air.

As a matter of fact, this obelisk was moved twice. Caligula moved it first to the Vatican Circus, a chariot race track that once laid adjacent to the current location of the bascilica. When the obelisk was moved to it's current position by Pope Sixtus V in 1586, the crabs that supported it were destroyed, so they were replaced by lions (see below).

Knowing what we now know it is always difficult when we run across things on the internet like the following:

"There are only three major obelisks in the world today, and two of them are in the United States. According to Epperson in his book, "The New World Order", the first major obelisk was constructed in St. Peter's square in Rome... The second obelisk was brought to America in 1881 from Alexandria, Egypt, and was placed in Central Park in New York City... The third obelisk is the Washington Monument." from - www.theforbiddenknowledge.com/chapter3/

The Monument is not an obelisk because it is not made of a solid piece of stone, the obelisk at the Vatican was not constructed there, it was moved there from Egypt, and there are others in London and Paris.

And consider this, "Note the location of the Washington Monument, which incidentally, is one of three ancient Egyptian obelisks taken from Luxor in Egypt (the other two standing in Paris and St Peterís Square in Rome)." from - http://www.freewebs.com/garyosborn/thewashingtonpyramid.htm

As has already been pointed out, the monument was built on the spot in DC and WAS NOT moved from Luxor. Yikes!!