Daniel’s Prayer of Confession and Exodus 20

Why Modern 'National Repentance for the Dead' Is Biblically Invalid

Last week, I wrote about the clarity that Ezekiel 18 gives us – that every person stands accountable for their own moral choices, and that we therefore are not responsible for the sins of our ancestors. Nor can we, as is a current trend, repent on their behalf. 

Both Daniel 9 and Exodus 20:5-6, however, seem to contradict Ezekiel 18 and this notion – at least at first glance.

Daniel the intercessor

Daniel’s prayer in Daniel 9 came as the time of Israel’s exile in Babylon was drawing to an end. He, along with the majority of Judah, was exiled because of the iniquities of that nation, as forewarned by God. 

Daniel, a man who was righteous, prayed: “We have sinned and done wrong… to us belongs open shame.” (Dan 9:5-8)

Some will argue that Scripture itself permits, or even encourages, national confession on behalf of past generations, particularly quoting this prayer. If Daniel can confess the sins of Israel, does that not legitimise modern attempts to repent for ancestral wrongdoing?

If Daniel can confess the sins of Israel, does that not legitimise modern attempts to repent for ancestral wrongdoing?

The answer is no, and the distinction is both vital and clarifying. Daniel’s prayer is not an exercise in symbolic, generational repentance. Daniel does not repent instead of guilty ancestors. He identifies himself with the present covenant condition of Judah as a nation under judgment. The exile is not merely a historical consequence; it is a present reality.

Daniel is not morally distancing himself from his people; he is standing among them as an intercessor. He prays as one living inside the consequences of national rebellion, not as a detached moral judge of the past. This is profoundly different from modern institutional repentance, which so often condemns the dead while absolving the present; denounces ancestors while congratulating ourselves; and substitutes symbolic confession for present obedience.

Daniel says, “We have sinned.”  Modern culture says, “They sinned.”

Daniel is personally righteous, yet he lives among a presently guilty nation. His confession is (therefore his prayer) is –

• intercessory, not symbolic
• covenantal, not ideological
• present-tense, not ancestral theatrics.

This is entirely consistent with Ezekiel 18: “A righteous man is not punished for another man’s guilt”; but he may intercede for a guilty nation under judgment.

Modern institutional repentance, which so often condemns the dead while absolving the present; denounces ancestors while congratulating ourselves ...

Ezekiel 18 forbids inherited guilt and ancestral moral binding, whereas Daniel 9 exemplifies righteous intercession, covenantal plea for mercy, and identification with present national rebellion. These two are not opposites, they are complementary.

Daniel never repented for ancient generations ; not Abraham, Moses, David, or any of the dead kings – not even Manasseh, possibly the worst king, whose reign and influence arguably led to Judah’s downfall. 

He repents in the present.

Exodus 20:5-6: The Nature of YHWH and the Key Hebrew Detail Everyone Misses

“You shall not bow down to them or serve them, for I, YHWH your God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children to the third and the fourth generation of those who hate Me, but showing steadfast love to thousands of those who love Me and keep My commandments.”

This is the verse most often used to argue that guilt is inherited, that descendants are punished for ancestors’ sins and, therefore, that repentance must be generational.

But that interpretation directly contradicts later, explicit revelation, especially Ezekiel 18.

So, the question is: Did God change His mind or was Exodus 20 always being misunderstood? The answer: Exodus 20 was being misunderstood. Let me explain. 

God allows the consequences of sin to continue in generations that continue the same hatred and rebellion.

The crucial phrase is: “of those who hate Me” (לְשֹׂנְאָ֔י – leson’ai).  This qualifier governs the entire judgment clause.

The text does NOT say that God punishes innocent children for guilty fathers.

What it does say is that God allows the consequences of sin to continue in generations that continue the same hatred and rebellion. In other words, judgment continues only where rebellion continues. It is not biological inheritance of guilt. It is spiritual persistence of the same sin.

How Ezekiel 18 Explicitly Corrects Any Misuse of Exodus 20

By Ezekiel’s time, Israel had developed a fatalistic proverb: “The fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the children’s teeth are set on edge.” (Ezekiel 18:2) This proverb is a direct misreading of Exodus 20 and God explicitly repudiates it: “The soul who sins shall die. The son shall not suffer for the iniquity of the father” (Ezekiel 18:20). This is not God contradicting Himself. This is God saying: “You misunderstood Me from the beginning.” 

Therefore: Exodus 20 warns about generational patterns of rebellion, whereas Ezekiel 18 destroys the idea of inherited guilt.

Together they teach that sin has social and generational consequences, but that guilt and judgment belong only to the actual sinner

Exodus 20 warns about generational patterns of rebellion, whereas Ezekiel 18 destroys the idea of inherited guilt.

How the three texts fit together

As we have already discovered, Daniel’s prayer does not indicate that Daniel is paying for ancestral guilt. Rather, he lives in the ongoing national consequence of rebellion (exile) and so confesses present covenant violation and intercedes as a righteous man among the guilty.

Therefore, Daniel 9 practises and models righteous intercession amid national consequence. Exodus 20 details that consequences can extend through history, but its emphasis is on those who continue in the same rebellion. And  Ezekiel 18 identifies that guilt remains personal. Guilt is one soul, one judgment, one repentance.

Daniel is therefore suffering historical consequence, not inherited guilt. Those are not the same thing.

Why Modern “Generational Repentance” Still Fails Biblically

Modern practice often assumes that if consequences last for generations then guilt must do also.

Scripture never makes that leap.

A child may grow up in poverty caused by ancestral greed or instability caused by ancestral violence, or, equally, unbelief may be caused by ancestral rebellion. But none of that makes the child guilty before God. Ezekiel 18 flatly forbids that conclusion.

Every person stands alone before God, not as a representative of the dead, but as a living moral agent created in His image. 

Exodus 20:5–6 teaches the continuation of consequences in generations that persist in the same rebellion, not the inheritance of moral guilt and Ezekiel 18 exists precisely to prevent that passage from being misused as a doctrine of generational condemnation.

Why Does This Matter Now?

The modern world seems obsessed with collective identity, inherited shame, and generational blame. Individuals are taught to see themselves primarily as extensions of historical groups, rather than as moral agents standing directly before God. This framework promises liberation but delivers only a new form of bondage, binding people to sins they did not commit, while subtly excusing the sins they are committing.

Ezekiel 18 cuts directly through this confusion. God does not ask us to carry our father’s guilt. God does not bind us to our nation’s past. God will not judge us for crimes committed before we were born. However, neither will He excuse the present rebellion simply because our ancestors were faithful. This is the weight, and the dignity of the human soul.

Every person stands alone before God, not as a representative of the dead, but as a living moral agent created in His image. This is not modern individualism. It is ancient covenant justice. It is the God of Israel refusing to allow history, heritage, or identity to replace repentance.

The Final Word: The Freedom of Present Obedience

Ezekiel’s message is not meant to crush the soul beneath unbearable responsibility. It is meant to liberate it. If guilt were inherited, hope would be impossible. If righteousness could be lost through ancestry alone, salvation would be forever out of reach. But God declares instead that we may turn. We may live. And we may begin again. Not because of who our parents were, not because of what our nation once did, but because we now stand before the Living God.

Souls stand one by one and repentance belongs to the living.

This article began by exposing the myth of inherited guilt. It now ends with the biblical alternative: present obedience before a present God.

• It is not repentance for the dead, but repentance for the living.
• It is not a symbolic confession, but a real turning. 
• It is not moral theatre, but covenant faithfulness.

In this, Ezekiel and Daniel do not conflict. They stand together:

Yes, history may shape us, nations may influence us. For Daniel shows us that nations fall under judgment. However, judgment belongs to God. Souls stand one by one, and repentance belongs to the living.