I like that, and it makes a lot of sense. I've seen some similar comparisons, but not quite a side by side like this one...
Thus, if Jesus was giving us a metaphor for hell, it wasn't a very good one. And how could he use a metaphor for something his listeners had never heard of? As I pointed out before, the Jews had no concept of eternal torment in hell. If this is new teaching, Jesus would have described and named this terrible place before using any metaphors. Unlike heaven, Jerusalem, and the Nile River, hell has no name in the Bible.
[/color]
I've had this discussion before with someone who stated something along the lines of "if Jesus was using an example, it was of real things that could/would happen", i.e., eternal hellfire...I think your points make a lot more sense, that Jesus would seem more probably to use pictures/analogies of things that were present/understood in their day...