The beginnings of ACIM are contentious. Helen Schucman, a clinical and study psychiatrist, stated that the text was formed to her by an inner voice she identified as Jesus Christ. This state is achieved with doubt because it lacks scientific evidence and relies seriously on Schucman's personal knowledge and subjective interpretation. Critics argue that undermines the standing of ACIM, because it is difficult to substantiate the declare of divine dictation. More over, Schucman's skilled history in psychology may have inspired the information of ACIM, mixing mental ideas with spiritual ideas in ways that some find questionable. The dependence about the same individual's knowledge increases concerns about the detachment and universality of the text.

Philosophically, ACIM is dependant on a mixture of Christian terminology and Eastern mysticism, offering a worldview that some disagree is internally inconsistent and contradictory to traditional religious doctrines. For instance, ACIM posits that the product world can be an illusion and that correct the reality is just spiritual. This view can conflict with the scientific and sensible approaches of American david hoffmeister a course in miracles philosophy, which emphasize the importance of the material world and individual experience. More over, ACIM's reinterpretation of old-fashioned Christian ideas, such as failure and forgiveness, is seen as distorting core Religious teachings. Authorities argue that syncretism contributes to a dilution and misrepresentation of established religious values, perhaps major fans astray from more coherent and historically grounded religious paths.

Psychologically, the teachings of ACIM could be problematic. The class encourages a form of rejection of the substance world and particular experience, selling the indisputable fact that people must surpass their physical living and target exclusively on spiritual realities. That perception can result in an application of cognitive dissonance, where individuals battle to reconcile their existed activities with the teachings of ACIM. Experts disagree this may result in emotional hardship, as people might feel pressured to dismiss their feelings, thoughts, and bodily feelings and only an abstract religious ideal. Furthermore, ACIM's focus on the illusory nature of putting up with is visible as dismissive of authentic human struggles and hardships, possibly minimizing the importance of addressing real-world problems and injustices.

The realistic application of ACIM's teachings can also be a place of contention. While some persons report positive transformations and personal growth from following the program, others find the methods to be inadequate as well as harmful. The course's emphasis on forgiveness and love is exceptional, but experts disagree that it may be excessively simplistic and naïve, failing to handle the complexities of individual associations and the requirement for limits and accountability. Moreover, the course's size and extensive nature may be frustrating for a lot of people, leading to burnout or disillusionment. Critics declare that enough time and energy required to perform ACIM could be greater allocated to more empirically supported beneficial practices or spiritual professions that have a proven track record of effectiveness.