Defining Being Existing Or Evolving

Both St. Thomas and Heidegger seem to be wrong in seeing an existing Being rather than an evolving Being, but Heidegger might have been more right  in the phenomenological sense of seeing Being only as a “presencing” or revealing of Itself, whereas St. Thomas saw Being as an always existing reality and actuality.

Here is why: it is the Spirit-Will within existing life that reveals Itself, not Being, since Being of Godhood doesn't exist until it is evolved to.  The Spirit-Will is not Godhood, it seeks Godhood throughout the cosmos by activating material and supermaterial life to evolve to Godhood.

There are truths unknown until intellectual intuition or revelation reveal them and then they are accessible to reason. But the truths first existed in revelation. Truth can also be revealed, or unveiled, through science. But the weakness of phenomenology and science is that they seem unable to seriously address Being or beings that exist outside the mind. Traditional metaphysics does address things outside the mind.

Can intellectual intuition be called divine revelation? In the sense of having this sort of contact with the Spirit-Will within life and activating life rather than a Being It has not yet been evolved to, perhaps it can be called revelation.

I see “faith” as the zenith of hypothesis and theory, which is as valid a way to see as phenomenology or science, and it requires as much integrity and honesty. Both should be applied.