When Shia are asked: Where is concept of 12 infallible shia imams in Quran?

Shia-ism is NOT Islam

أمس الساعة ‏٤:٣٣ ص‏ · 

When Shia are asked: Where is concept of 12 infallible shia imams in Quran? They respond with:
Where is concept of Khilafa in the Quran? #Doubt #Refuted

Firstly, it is not appropriate to answer a question with a question.
We oftentimes see Shia responding to questions with questions, as if the Ahlus Sunnah also being wrong somehow justifies the Shia to be wrong. If the Ahlus Sunnah said that 2+2 is not 6 as the Shia believe, would it be valid for the Shia to respond that 6 is correct since the Ahlus Sunnah say 2+2 is 5 and this too is incorrect? Both 5 and 6 are incorrect answers.
The point is that it is not a valid methodology of justifying one’s faith by finding errors in someone else’s faith.

Having said that, this question raised by the Shia only shows the misunderstanding of some people about the belief of the Ahlus Sunnah wal Jama’ah.

>>Believing in the Caliphs is not a fundamental element of Islam. According to the Ahlus Sunnah, there are only 6 Articles of Faith and 5 Pillars of Islam; believing in the Caliphate of Abu Bakr (رضّى الله عنه) is not part of either of them.
(This is altogether unlike the Shia faith in which Imamah is an article of faith and is the most important one.)

Any group of people tends to select someone as their leader. And the rational and most reasonable way to do so is by election. This is a routine social/political practise. Certainly, no system of public election was established at that time and the election of Abu Bakr (رضّى الله عنه) was done through Shura of those people present at Saqifah. Someone could argue that Abu Bakr (رضّى الله عنه) was not a good choice or that not all qualified people were present at the time; this is an individual opinion, but it has nothing to do with looking for evidences in the Quran about it. It is simply a routine social practice that was and is and will be done in any society and no logical mind would expect a divine evidence for that.

Let us not compare apples with oranges. The doctrine of Imamah is a fundamental belief of Shi’ism, whereas election or selection of Caliphate is just a routine and common socio-political practise. It’s like comparing the election procedure of President of the USA (i.e. Caliphate) to the divine appointment of the Pope by the Vatican (i.e. Infallible Imam). The President (or the Caliphate) doesn’t claim Divine Providence like does the Pope (or the Imam). If a certain person wants to claim religious right and divine appointment, then surely this person better bring the proof from the religious book!

On the other hand, does anybody ask for divine proof when one selects a President or even the Imam of prayers in our mosques? Nobody would ask an MSA President to bring evidence from the Quran about his election, but if someone were to claim to be divinely appointed by Allah (عز و جل), then we ask for evidence from the Quran for this claim.

In any case, let us look at the present situation in Iran. Is there any divine command about how to establish a leadership in the occultation of Mehdi?

Abu Bakr (رضّى الله عنه) was selected to lead much like Khomeini was selected to lead. Let us remember that there were no religious system of governing for the Shia after the occultation of the Mehdi 1,000 years ago.

No divine ordinance came down to make Ayatollah Khomeini leader of Iran; in fact, there were many Ayatollahs who spoke out against Khomeini and they were subsequently jailed for treason.

It has turned out that the Shia ended up being in the same situation as the mainstream Muslims, namely that they had to elect a leader by themselves in the absence of any direct divine command or appointment.

Why are the Shia so much against Abu Bakr (رضّى الله عنه) and yet they support Khomeini?