Please don't think I am "resisting" as much as offering an observation. I should not have stated it so emphatically. You are using the first and most important rule of interpretation: Compare Scripture with Scripture. Most do not.
I am merely pointing out that, as Kings and Chronicles are historical narrative, if we read it as the simple sentence it is meant to be, and in context, 666 modifies the word 'gold' not 'Solomon'.
Grammatically, Solomon is farther away, in the essence of the sentence, than is the gold, from 666. It would seem to me that gold should be the number 1 suspect here, if at all. If you have a reason to disregard this, say on.
Also, Kings and Chronicles are actually recording the same history, much the same as the 4 gospels give the same basic history. This would mean that both references together should be considered as descriptions of one and not two separate records. This reduces your original idea from 2 refs. in the OT to (qualitatively) 1, the same quantity as in the NT.
I just don't think it is as obvious as you do, but; :carryon: