More over, the language and design of ACIM are often criticized for being very complex and esoteric. The course's thick and repeated prose can be difficult to comprehend and interpret, ultimately causing frustration and misinterpretation among readers. This complexity can create a buffer to entry, rendering it difficult for people to fully interact with and take advantage of the course. Some authorities disagree that the convoluted language is really a deliberate technique to obscure having less substantive content and to produce an impression of profundity. The problem in comprehending the product can also cause a dependence on additional teachers and interpreters, more perpetuating the commercialization and prospect of exploitation within the ACIM community.

Also, the notion of forgiveness as shown in ACIM has been criticized for being overly simplistic and possibly dismissive of true hurt and injustice. david hoffmeister The program advocates for a questionnaire of forgiveness that involves recognizing the illusory character of the perceived offense and allowing get of grievances. While this approach could be helpful in selling internal peace and reducing particular putting up with, it may not adequately handle the complexities of particular conditions, such as punishment or endemic injustice. Authorities disagree this type of forgiveness can be seen as reducing the activities of victims and absolving perpetrators of accountability. This can result in a questionnaire of religious bypassing, wherever individuals use religious ideas to prevent coping with unpleasant feelings and hard realities.

The entire worldview shown by ACIM, which highlights the illusory nature of the material earth and the vanity, may also be problematic. That perception can cause an application of spiritual escapism, wherever persons disengage from the bodily world and their problems and only an idealized religious reality. While this might give temporary relief or perhaps a feeling of transcendence, additionally it may create a insufficient involvement with important aspects of life, such as for example associations, responsibilities, and cultural issues. Authorities argue that disengagement may be detrimental to equally the average person and society, because it stimulates a form of passivity and neglect of real-world problems.

The exclusivity of ACIM is another level of contention. The program often presents itself as a superior spiritual course, hinting that different spiritual or religious traditions are less valid or effective. This exclusivity may foster a feeling of spiritual elitism among adherents and build division as opposed to unity. In addition, it limits the prospect of people to draw on a varied selection of spiritual assets and traditions inside their personal development and healing. Critics argue that a more inclusive and integrative method of spirituality will be more helpful and less divisive.