Furthermore, the language and structure of ACIM tend to be criticized to be very complicated and esoteric. The course's dense and repetitive prose may be tough to know and understand, resulting in confusion and misinterpretation among readers. This difficulty can cause a buffer to access, which makes it problematic for persons to fully engage with and benefit from the course. Some experts argue that the complicated language is a deliberate method to obscure having less substantive material and to generate an impression of profundity. The problem in comprehending the substance also can cause a dependence on additional teachers and interpreters, further perpetuating the commercialization and potential for exploitation within the ACIM community.

Furthermore, the idea of forgiveness as presented in ACIM has been criticized for being overly simplified and possibly dismissive of real damage and injustice. The course advocates for an application of forgiveness that involves knowing the illusory character of the perceived offense and allowing move of grievances. While this approach may be useful in marketing inner peace and reducing personal enduring, acim it might not acceptably address the difficulties of specific situations, such as for example abuse or systemic injustice. Critics disagree that type of forgiveness is visible as minimizing the activities of patients and absolving perpetrators of accountability. This may cause a form of spiritual skipping, wherever individuals use spiritual methods to avoid dealing with painful emotions and difficult realities.

The entire worldview shown by ACIM, which stresses the illusory character of the substance world and the pride, can also be problematic. That perspective can lead to an application of religious escapism, wherever individuals disengage from the bodily world and their difficulties and only an idealized spiritual reality. While this could give short-term comfort or even a sense of transcendence, it can also create a lack of proposal with essential aspects of living, such as relationships, responsibilities, and social issues. Critics fight this disengagement can be detrimental to equally the person and culture, since it advances an application of passivity and neglect of real-world problems.

The exclusivity of ACIM is yet another point of contention. The course often occurs as an exceptional spiritual journey, implying that different religious or religious traditions are less legitimate or effective. That exclusivity may foster a sense of religious elitism among adherents and produce division as opposed to unity. In addition it restricts the possibility of individuals to draw on a diverse selection of religious methods and traditions inside their personal growth and healing. Experts disagree that the more inclusive and integrative approach to spirituality could be more beneficial and less divisive.