Analysis of symbolism in the signs and symptoms of emergence

Language of religion is of the most demanding issues in philosophy of religion and theological discussions in this regard. Statements by researchers in language, religion, theology and theological are of two types, the general and the specific. The general account holds that these statements are general to theological and kalam issues and includes all religious texts. Meanwhile the specific accounts, is the language that only concerns the names and attributes of God and that those God’s attributes which are similar to human. In both approaches, perspectives and different findings from the past to the present period can be found in the thoughts of theologians and the kalam religious scholars and philosophers of religion. Considering all this language as the symbolic representation is one of the main theological propositions, and one of those views. According to this first approach, the issue of Mahdaviyyat and Muslim religious texts with messianic teachings and apocalypse, especially the symptoms of emergence can be considered as a field inside the language of religion. In this paper, with a descriptive and analytical approach, we are seeking a response to this question, that by accepting the latter view, what interpretations we can get from statements related to the symptoms of emergence of Mahdi? Are they just symbolic or non-symbolic? And if they are realistic and for our knowledge, are they by no means symbolic or considered so? And if so, what kind of symbol is concerned here? The icon and the symbol which is now defined in the philosophy of religion and among Western thinkers, or another alternative model can be the case?