Scriptura 122 (2023:1), pp. 1-11 http://scriptura.journals.ac.za http://dx.doi.org/10.7833/122-1-2067 Noah’s Ark and the Flood in Judaism and Islam: A Bi-optic Perspective of Salvation and Sacred Space Joshua Joel Spoelstra Department of Old and New Testament Stellenbosch University Abstract This article analyses Noah’s ark and the flood events from the sacred texts and traditions of Judaism and Islam in an integrative manner. After juxtaposing the Flood Narrative in the Tanakh and the Noahic sūrahs of the Qur’an, key cognate lexemes are examined and their ideological trajectories traced. It is argued, particularly, that, in addition to the evident message of salvation in the Flood texts and traditions, there is a discernible ideological motif of sacred space in both religions, specifically the ark of Noah equivalent to or associated with a temple structure. Further, the Noah’s ark tradition seeps into various ancillary religious practices, both in various eras of Judaism and in Sunnism and Shiism. Thus, the convergences and divergences between Judaism and Islam, the Hebrew Bible and Qur’an concerning the reception history of a common patriarch (Noah) and shared spaces (ark, temple/mosque) is richly variegated from a bi-optic hermeneutical perspective. Keywords: Noah; Ark; Flood; Judaism; Islam; Temple; Ideology; Theology; Qur’an; Hebrew Bible; Muhammad Introduction There are many convergences and divergences amongst the shared scriptural narratives of Judaism and Islam. Of these textual correspondences, the patriarch Noah, as well as the ark and flood, looms large in the Hebrew Bible and Qur’an. In this article, I examine the flood vessel in both sacred scriptures and trace its theological reception and various religious appropriations in Judaism and Islam. I will demonstrate that juxtaposing sacred texts and religious traditions mutually informs and illuminates Noah’s ark as a sacred space, purporting temple ideology. 1 The hermeneutical methodology employed herein is that of a bi-optic perspective. 2 Through a bi-optic approach, I aim, rather than merely performing a comparative analysis, to present a balanced and complementary outlook of two distinct traditions (vs. pitting one tradition against another). Each ensuing section, therefore, heuristically seeks to intersect religious meaning from alternate avenues. From this appreciative, 1 In previous works, I have addressed this complex issue. See Spoelstra 2023a; 2023b; 2020:107–19, 248–55, 338–40. Nevertheless, in this article I streamline and expand the argument, as well as engage an interfaith/inter-scriptural analysis in juxtaposition—which is original. 2 The term and general approach are inspired by Paul Anderson (2001:175–88), though I appropriate it differently as indicated. Cf. also Sharma 2005; Roberts 2019:526–35.