“The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.”

This is text is presented as a “knock down” to the Pauline doctrine of Original Sin. They don’t realize that the issue isn’t about Adam’s sin , but generational sin and this karmic thought that the Jews ascertained while in exile. This ignores the fact many reformed Christians have already responded to this charge. For example, Turretinfan and Steve Hays has written on this:

Summary
The chapter is a response to the Jewish (extra-Scriptural) proverb, “The fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the children’s teeth are set on edge.” The proverb is a challenge to God’s fairness. In essence, the proverb is the complaining proverb a people suffering for their sins, but seeking to place the blame elsewhere. God responds to this proverb by telling the people that they should not make excuses: if they will repent, they will be saved.
Detailed Exegesis
By the “sour grapes” proverb, the people are, in essence, saying that they have done everything right, but God is still punishing them, because their fathers were wicked. We can see that this is not something unique to the Jews of Ezekiel’s day:
Matthew 23:29-32
29Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! because ye build the tombs of the prophets, and garnish the sepulchers of the righteous, 30And say, If we had been in the days of our fathers, we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets. 31Wherefore ye be witnesses unto yourselves, that ye are the children of them which killed the prophets. 32Fill ye up then the measure of your fathers.
You see the Pharisees, like their physical and spiritual ancestors were outwardly religious. They condemned their fathers – but they were not really any better. They did not have the prophets, but they let the greatest prophet of all, John the Baptist, be beheaded. They did not have Isaiah, but they had him of whom Isaiah prophesied, and they slew him. In fact, they were not right with God. They may have blamed their fathers for the Roman occupation, but they did not deserve better, and they and their children were punished for their sin by the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70.
The gist of the proverbs seems to be a comparison to a situation in which a child is born deformed, on account of the father eating bad grapes before conceiving the child. Thus, the child is punished with bad teeth because of the father’s bad judgment, or perhaps even his simple mistake.
The underlying theme is that this is unfair. Why should a child be punished for something someone else did? The human mind, full of autonomy (in Ezekiel’s day, in Jesus’ day, and in our day), doesn’t like the idea of responsibility that is outside an individual’s control.
God answers to Israel saying that will “not have occasion any more to use this proverb.”
He begins by relying on his sovereignty: “All souls are mine,” God says, “equally the soul of the father and of the child.” God does not stop there but continues, “the soul that sins shall die.”
This is God’s rhetorical comprise to the complainers. He tells them up front that he can do what he wants with the souls of men – with their lives. They are all his. He has decreed that those who sin will die. This is his right as Creator.
In verses 5-9, God describes a hypothetical righteous man. This righteous man obeys God’s law down to even the ceremonial details of not sleeping with his wife during her period. He does everything right, and God says that such a man will live.
Then, in verses 10-13, God describes a hypothetical son of the righteous man. This son does not follow in his father’s footsteps. Instead, this son is a robber, a murderer, and an adulterer. He does do everything right – in fact, he does everything wrong, and God says that such a man will surely die. Finally, in verses 14-17, God describes a hypothetical son of the wicked man. This son does not follow in his father’s footsteps. Instead, he repents of his father’s sins (“seeth all his father’s sins which he hath done, and considereth, and doeth not such like”) and lives righteously. God says that such a son will live, and that God will not punish such a son for the iniquity of the wicked father.
In verse 18, God clarifies that nevertheless the father who was wicked will nevertheless die for his iniquity. In other words, his righteous son will not redeem the father’s wickedness.
But the people are very stubborn. They ask, “Why? doth not the son bear the iniquity of the father?” The think they are very clever, because they remember the law:
Exodus 34:7 Keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, and that will by no means clear the guilty; visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, and upon the children’s children, unto the third and to the fourth generation.
But they do not understand God’s point. So, God answers them: “When the son hath done that which is lawful and right, and hath kept all my statutes, and hath done them, he shall surely live.” God’s point is to convict the complaining people of their sin.
God even goes further. He offers the people a morality of pure individualism: “The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him. “
It is as though God says, “Oh, so you want to be considered on your own individual merits: fine, let it be so.” It’s to their condemnation, not their justification.God explains further that He will even go further and permit repentance: “But if the wicked will turn from all his sins that he hath committed, and keep all my statutes, and do that which is lawful and right, he shall surely live, he shall not die. All his transgressions that he hath committed, they shall not be mentioned unto him: in his righteousness that he hath done he shall live.”
Notice the parallel to the first situation. In the first situation, the person has a wicked father, but he lives righteously, and God lets him live. In the second situation, the person is himself wicked, but he repents, and God lets him live.
You see, if God will turn aside judgment from those who repent, then it does not matter that the father sinned. If a person will repent (see what his father did and do otherwise – or see what he himself has done and do otherwise) he will live.
God completes his thought regarding the acceptability of repentance for life with this comment (which has itself often been misunderstood): “Have I any pleasure at all that the wicked should die? saith the Lord GOD: and not that he should return from his ways, and live?”
What God is saying is that he has not ruled out repentance – that the fact that the wages of sin are death, and that children bear the iniquities of their fathers, these facts do not make God out to be a God who simply wants men to sin and die. No, God has permitted life even for sinners, through repentance.
That this is what God means can be seen not only from the context above, but from God’s own explanation by comparison: “But when the righteous turneth away from his righteousness, and committeth iniquity, and doeth according to all the abominations that the wicked man doeth, shall he live? All his righteousness that he hath done shall not be mentioned: in his trespass that he hath trespassed, and in his sin that he hath sinned, in them shall he die.”
God provides a comparison: if a wicked man repents he will live, and if a righteous man apostatizes, he will die.
But the people still refuse to acknowledge God’s justice. They say, “The way of the Lord is not equal.” This is a serious and indeed blasphemous charge against God. Note that “not equal” is the etymological root of “iniquity.” They are basically charging God with sin.
God responds with justified indignation: “O house of Israel; Is not my way equal? are not your ways unequal?” God convicts the people of Israel of sin. He is righteous, they are sinners.
Again, the people say, “The way of the Lord is not equal.”
And again, God replies: “Hear now, O house of Israel; Is not my way equal? are not your ways unequal?”
God then repeats essentially the same thing he just said. First, if a righteous man apostasies, he will die: “When a righteous man turneth away from his righteousness, and committeth iniquity, and dieth in them; for his iniquity that he hath done shall he die.” Second, if a wicked man repents, he will live: “Again, when the wicked man turneth away from his wickedness that he hath committed, and doeth that which is lawful and right, he shall save his soul alive. Because he considereth, and turneth away from all his transgressions that he hath committed, he shall surely live, he shall not die.”
Again, a third time the people say, “The way of the Lord is not equal.”
And again, God replies: “Hear now, O house of Israel; Is not my way equal? are not your ways unequal?”
So, God gives them one last chance to repent, and he makes clear that this what he is offering, regardless of their fathers’ sins, regardless of their own sins, and yet – in doing so – he reveals the missing link in the chain:
“Therefore I will judge you, O house of Israel, every one according to his ways, saith the Lord GOD. Repent, and turn yourselves from all your transgressions; so iniquity shall not be your ruin. Cast away from you all your transgressions, whereby ye have transgressed; and make you a new heart and a new spirit: for why will ye die, O house of Israel? For I have no pleasure in the death of him that dieth, saith the Lord GOD: wherefore turn yourselves, and live ye.”
Did you notice what is the missing link in their chain? “Make you a new heart and a new spirit.” That’s what they need – something they cannot provide for themselves.”

http://turretinfan.blogspot.com/2008/04/misuse-of-ezekiel-18-especially-ezekiel.html

“Let’s look at the context of Ezekiel 18. We have to ask ourselves what Ezekiel is discussing. What he’s discussing the statements of his audience that they are being held responsible for the sins of their fathers. He tells them that they are responsible insofar as they agree with them.
Indeed, God specifically says He does hold other generations accountable for the sins of the fathers no less than 4 times within the Law itself. …
So, rather than saying that infants are innocent, we should be asking how God can say what He says in Ezekiel as well as what He says in the Law. Ezekiel 18 doesn’t represent a change in the Law. Indeed, we should ask ourselves what the recipients of Genesis would have thought, knowing the Law, when reading the Law and seeing that the father of us all fell into sin, and not just in any way, for he plunged the whole race into sin in the process.
Ezekiel 18 is not a get out of jail free clause for people who have allegedly committed no sins. It doesn’t address the concept of original sin, infant mortality, or the imputation of Adam’s sin. Moreover, the argument that this text addresses runs like this:
My father sins. His sins are imputed to me. This occurs from one generation to the next, eg. each male from one generation to the next has his sins imputed to me.
But that’s not the argument for the imputation of Adam’s sin to his posterity.
That argument runs this way:
Adam sins. We are born in his likeness. His sin is imputed directly to us. Further, Adam was the best of us. The fact that we sin is proof that, if we were Adam, we would do no better. So, we approve of his sin when we sin, and we would, in any other world, do no better. Thereby the imputation of Adam’s sin to us is proven.
The point of Ezekiel 18 is simply this, men are not held to account for the sins of their father if they repent of their sins. This text would only apply to the situation at hand if infants could repent of their fathers’ sins, but that’s not B2K’s argument. No, his argument is that infants are born in a state of innocence.”

http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2008/11/pelagian-dualisma.html