▁▁ ▁The ▁oppos ing ▁view ▁stem med ▁from ▁the ▁idea ▁that ▁be getting ▁the ▁Son ▁is ▁itself ▁in ▁the ▁nature ▁of ▁the ▁Father , ▁which ▁is ▁et ernal . ▁Thus , ▁the ▁Father ▁was ▁always ▁a ▁Father , ▁and ▁both ▁Father ▁and ▁Son ▁existed ▁always ▁together , ▁et ern ally , ▁co equ ally ▁and ▁cons ub st ant ial ly . ▁The ▁contra - A rian ▁argument ▁thus ▁stated ▁that ▁the ▁Log os ▁was ▁" et ern ally ▁beg ot ten ", ▁therefore ▁with ▁no ▁beginning . ▁Those ▁in ▁opposition ▁to ▁Ari us ▁believed ▁that ▁to ▁follow ▁the ▁A rian ▁view ▁destroyed ▁the ▁unity ▁of ▁the ▁God head , ▁and ▁made ▁the ▁Son ▁une qual ▁to ▁the ▁Father . ▁They ▁ins isted ▁that ▁such ▁a ▁view ▁was ▁in ▁contra vention ▁of ▁such ▁Script ures ▁as ▁" I ▁and ▁the ▁Father ▁are ▁one " ▁() ▁and ▁" the ▁Word ▁was ▁God " ▁( ), ▁as ▁such ▁vers es ▁were ▁interpreted . ▁They ▁declared , ▁as ▁did ▁Ath anas ius , ▁that ▁the ▁Son ▁had ▁no ▁beginning , ▁but ▁had ▁an ▁" et ernal ▁deriv ation " ▁from ▁the ▁Father , ▁and ▁therefore ▁was ▁co et ernal ▁with ▁him , ▁and ▁equal ▁to ▁God ▁in ▁all ▁aspects . ▁ ▁Result ▁of ▁the ▁debate ▁▁ ▁The ▁Council ▁declared ▁that ▁the ▁Son ▁was ▁true ▁God , ▁co et ernal ▁with ▁the ▁Father ▁and ▁beg ot ten ▁from ▁His ▁same ▁subst ance , ▁arg uing ▁that ▁such ▁a ▁doctrine ▁best ▁cod ified ▁the ▁Script ural ▁presentation ▁of