There is hope, none-the-less, that justice can be served but it takes divine intervention.  The Lord has already divinely intervened.  Sir William Blackstone, in his Commentaries on the Laws of England (1766),  said, “…upon these two foundations, the law of nature and the law of revelation, depend all human laws; that is to say, no human laws should be suffered to contradict these.”  With regard to this “law of revelation” that Blackstone spoke about, he said, “… the doctrines thus delivered we call the revealed or divine law, and they are to be found only in the holy scriptures.”  (Sir William Blackstones Commentaries on the Laws of England, Introduction, §2, p. 42)  Thus, men can discern that which is just, but it can “…be found only in the holy scriptures.”

     Should all men, descended from light-skinned people, make restitution to men descended from dark-skinned people, for the sins and wounds of their predecessors?  Is it in the interest of fairness or justice that such an idea would be contemplated?  Is it fair that dark-skinned people descendants statistically are born to parents who were born to parents who did not have a significant amount of wealth compared to their lighter-skinned contemporaries?  Is it fair that men descended from lighter-skinned should be penalized for misdeeds of some light-skinned men who preceded them in history?  What is the fair thing to do in order to achieve justice?  Is it possible that the just thing ought to be done in order to achieve that which is fair.   Is there a reference that we can use to guide us in this determination?  Has it been revealed or are we left to our degenerate reasoning?

      The Lord revealed this in the Bible, "For I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children to the third and fourth generations of those who hate Me, but showing mercy to thousands, to those who love Me and keep My commandments."  (Exodus 20:5-6)  Does that mean that it is just, and therefore fair, to hold the children to the third and fourth generation accountable for the sins of their predecessors?  How can we reconcile the scripture that says, “Fathers shall not be put to death for their children, nor shall children be put to death for their fathers; a person shall be put to death for his own sin."  (Deuteronomy 24:16)?  

     The pudding is in the proof and our freedom comes in proportion to our faith.  If we would be willing to have faith in the Lord, His directives, and the authority of His Holy Bible, we will then be able to orient our thoughts so that we can know and do that which is just and fair.  Stealing from Alfred Lord Tennyson , “Ours is not to reason why, it is but to do and die.” (The Charge of the Light Brigade)  It is the Lord who has the responsibility of determining, or reasoning, that which is just.  Ours is merely to do that which He has revealed.  

      Notice that in Exodus 20:5-6, it says, it is "I, the LORD your God,..." who is the one who may visit the iniquity of the fathers on their posterity.  In Deuteronomy 24:16, we see that the Lord has reserved the right to Him alone to do mercy or retribution to a sinful man's posterity.  For us however, he restricts our actions.  This scripture shows that we have no authority to take retribution upon one for another man's sins, not even to his next generation.  "You shall not take vengeance, nor bear any grudge against the children of your people, but you shall love your neighbor as yourself: I am the LORD."  (Leviticus 19:18)

     A court of man holding this generation accountable for sins of previous generations cannot be fair because it cannot be just.  It cannot be just because man has no authority to hold one man accountable for another man's sins.  Such retribution or mercy is reserved to the Lord by the Lord.  This biblical 'just' principle is reflected in the U.S Constitution that says, "'...no attainder of treason shall work corruption of blood, or forfeiture, except during the life of the person attained."   This "corruption of blood" was the taking of property from the heirs of one convicted of treason.  Punitive measures were restricted to the man committing the crime and could not be exacted upon the liberty or property rights of his posterity.  

     The law of the Lord shows itself in the codified laws of men.  Yet sadly, evil men who do not understand justice,  cannot rightly apply law unless the correct biblical principle is brought to bear on the issue at bar.   "From His mouth come knowledge and understanding; He stores up sound wisdom for the upright; He is a shield to those who walk uprightly;  He guards the paths of justice, and preserves the way of His saints.  (Proverbs 2: 6-8)  On the basis of scripture then, it is unjust to favor one man or people group at the expense of another on the basis of the sins of a predecessors man or people group.   On this biblical basis, the U.S. Supreme Court in the Ricci v. DeStefano case appears to have rightly applied the law to the facts and merits of the case.  I conclude that not on the basis of my reason, but because my reason is committed to the benchmark of the Bible.  

     On our Weekday Faith and Freedom show, we challenge our listeners to examine the basis of their opinions and their actions.  We introduce them to a biblical perspective.  We believe that they will reap long-term rewards for approaching the crises of our day from a biblical perspective.  We also hope that they will begin to see that there is an Author of ultimate truth.  We remind them that Jesus said, "If you abide in my words, you are my disciples indeed.  And you shall know the truth and the truth shall make you free.  (John 8:31-32)  http://www.faithfreedoms.org