Naskh and Badā (revealing after concealing, alteration in the divine will) in the reappearance and signs of the reappearance of the savior of the universe and the investigation of the charge of Fakhr Razi and his followers to the Shiites

Since the Shiites accept Naskh and Badā’ in the knowledge of God, the question arises as to whether in the issue of the reappearance of the savior of the universe and the signs for that which have come in the traditions from the infallible, the issues of Naskh and
Badā’ is applicable or not? Or whether these two are from the divine promise that “God never fails in His promise”. Of course, there is basically a problem between the Shi’a and the Sunni, which seems to be a rhetorical one. Otherwise, both religions accept Beda in the metaphorical sense of “appointed from God and appointed to God” and Shiite scholars emphasized it and Sunni scholars have quotes in this sense, such as: Ibn Athir’s quote in Sahih-e-Bukhara’i. But as to the signs of the reappearance, the narratives divide
them into two categories. Conclusive signs of reappearance and contingent and uncertain symptoms of reappearance. In the first category, most scholars believe that there is no way to Bada. However, some people believe in Bada, whose reason can be ruled out. But in the second way, it should be said that there is a way to Bada, albeit not in the sense that these signs certainly will not happen, but the principle is the occurrence of these signs because it is is-sued from the infallibles, however, there is also possibility of bada in them. There is no difference in the principle of the argument of
the reappearance that there is no way to bada, and the reappearance of Imam is a divine promise.