The practical software of ACIM's teachings can be a point of contention. Although some individuals report positive transformations and particular development from after the program, the others get the techniques to be useless as well as harmful. The course's emphasis on forgiveness and love is excellent, but critics disagree that it may be overly easy and naïve, failing to deal with the complexities of human associations and the requirement for boundaries and accountability. Also, the course's size and extensive character may be overwhelming for some people, leading to burnout or disillusionment. Critics suggest that enough time and energy needed to perform ACIM might be greater spent on more empirically reinforced therapeutic practices or religious disciplines which have a proven track record of effectiveness.

The broader affect of ACIM on the religious and self-help neighborhoods can also be value considering. The course has influenced a substantial following and has been incorporated into different New Age and david hoffmeister spiritual movements. Nevertheless, their impact can be seen as a double-edged sword. On a single hand, it has presented a framework for persons seeking religious development and internal peace. On the other give, its teachings can donate to a tradition of spiritual bypassing, where persons use religious ideas to prevent working with personal and social issues. This can cause a form of escapism, where the focus on religious ideals distracts from the necessity of participating with and handling real-world challenges.

Furthermore, the professional accomplishment of ACIM and their connected materials increases honest concerns. The expansion of workshops, publications, and seminars predicated on ACIM is visible as capitalizing on individuals' spiritual wants and vulnerabilities. Critics fight that the commercialization of spirituality may cause the exploitation of seekers, who might invest substantial time and money into methods that finally do not supply on their promises. That commercialization also can donate to the dilution of the course's teachings, as numerous interpretations and adaptations proliferate, probably leading to frustration and misapplication of the principles.

Another critical aspect to take into account could be the exclusivity and dogmatism that can occasionally accompany the ACIM community. As the course itself encourages general love and forgiveness, the way in which it is shown and used by some adherents can cause a sense of spiritual elitism. This can create an "us versus them" mindset, wherever those that follow ACIM are seen as enlightened, while people who don't are seen as misguided or unenlightened. Such attitudes could be divisive and detrimental to the course's supposed targets of peace and unity. Authorities disagree that correct spiritual growth should foster inclusivity and humility, rather than making a hierarchical difference between the spiritually awakened and the unawakened.

The issue of whether ACIM is "true" eventually depends on one's criteria for truth. From a clinical perception, having less empirical evidence promoting the states of heavenly dictation and the course's metaphysical assertions could be grounds for skepticism. From a philosophical perspective, the internal inconsistencies and syncretism of ACIM can result in questions about their coherence and sensible validity. From a psychological perspective, the potential for cognitive dissonance and emotional distress raises considerations in regards to the course's effect on psychological health. And from a functional perspective, the blended results noted by practitioners and the possibility of commercialization and exploitation suggest that ACIM's efficiency and honest standing are questionable.