From the emotional viewpoint, the beginnings of ACIM raise questions about their validity. Helen Schucman, the principal scribe of the text, said that what were formed to her by an interior voice she determined as Jesus. This method of obtaining the writing through inner dictation, called channeling, is frequently met with skepticism. Authorities argue that channeling may be understood as a mental sensation rather than true spiritual revelation. Schucman herself was a scientific psychologist, and some claim that the style she noticed has been a manifestation of her subconscious mind as opposed to an external heavenly entity. Furthermore, Schucman indicated ambivalence about the task and their beginnings, sometimes pondering their reliability herself. That ambivalence, along with the technique of the text's reception, casts uncertainty on the legitimacy of ACIM as a divinely influenced scripture.

The content of ACIM also encourages scrutiny from the philosophical angle. The class shows that the entire world we see with this senses can be an impression and our true fact lies beyond this physical realm. That idealistic view, which echoes specific Eastern concepts, difficulties the materialistic and scientific foundations of European thought. Critics disagree that the claim david hoffmeister that the bodily earth is definitely an illusion isn't substantiated by scientific evidence and runs counter to the clinical approach, which relies on visible and measurable phenomena. The idea of an illusory world might be convincing as a metaphor for the distortions of belief due to the pride, but as a literal assertion, it lacks the scientific help needed to be described as a legitimate representation of reality.

Moreover, the practical program of ACIM's teachings could be problematic. The program advocates for a radical type of forgiveness, suggesting that issues are illusions and ought to be ignored and only recognizing the natural unity of all beings. Whilst the training of forgiveness may certainly be healing and transformative, ACIM's approach might lead persons to curb legitimate emotions and dismiss true injustices. By mounting all negative activities as illusions developed by the confidence, there is a danger of reducing or invalidating the lived activities of suffering and trauma. That perspective may be particularly hazardous for persons working with critical issues such as for example punishment or oppression, as it might discourage them from seeking the necessary support and interventions.

Yet another stage of rivalry is the way in which ACIM has been advertised and commercialized. Because its book, ACIM has spawned a significant market of workshops, seminars, and supplementary materials. Critics disagree that this commercialization undermines the religious strength of the teachings, turning what is proposed to be a sacred text in to a profit-driven enterprise. The growth of ACIM-related items and companies has light emitting diode some to problem the motivations behind their promotion and the credibility of people who declare to teach their principles. That industrial part can make a buffer to real spiritual exploration, as people may possibly be much more dedicated to purchasing another book or joining another workshop rather than participating profoundly with the teachings themselves.