In summary, while A Class in Miracles has garnered an important following and supplies a distinctive approach to spirituality, there are many arguments and evidence to suggest it is fundamentally mistaken and false. The reliance on channeling as its supply, the significant deviations from traditional Christian and recognized religious teachings, the promotion of religious bypassing, and the prospect of emotional and honest problems all increase serious considerations about its validity and impact. The deterministic worldview, possibility of cognitive dissonance, moral implications, practical problems, commercialization, and lack of empirical evidence further undermine the course's credibility and reliability. Finally, while A Program in Wonders may offer some ideas and benefits to individual supporters, their over all teachings and claims must be approached with warning and critical scrutiny.

A claim that the program in wonders is false may be fought from a few perspectives, contemplating the nature of its teachings, their origins, and its effect on individuals. "A Program in Miracles" (ACIM) is a guide that offers a religious philosophy directed at major david hoffmeister  persons to a state of internal peace through a process of forgiveness and the relinquishing of ego-based thoughts. Published by Helen Schucman and William Thetford in the 1970s, it states to have been determined by an interior style recognized as Jesus Christ. This assertion alone places the text in a controversial position, particularly within the world of standard religious teachings and clinical scrutiny.

From a theological perception, ACIM diverges significantly from orthodox Religious doctrine. Standard Christianity is seated in the belief of a transcendent God, the divinity of Jesus Christ, and the importance of the Bible as the best spiritual authority. ACIM, however, gift ideas a view of God and Jesus that varies markedly. It explains Jesus not as the unique of but as one of several beings who have recognized their correct nature within God. This non-dualistic strategy, wherever God and formation are viewed as fundamentally one, contradicts the dualistic character of main-stream Religious theology, which considers Lord as different from His creation. Moreover, ACIM downplays the significance of crime and the requirement for salvation through Jesus Christ's atonement, main tenets of Religious faith. Instead, it posits that failure is definitely an impression and that salvation is a matter of repairing one's belief of reality. This revolutionary departure from recognized Religious values leads several theologians to ignore ACIM as heretical or incompatible with conventional Religious faith.

From a mental viewpoint, the origins of ACIM increase questions about its validity. Helen Schucman, the primary scribe of the writing, stated that the language were determined to her by an internal style she identified as Jesus. This process of receiving the text through inner dictation, called channeling, is usually achieved with skepticism. Experts argue that channeling could be recognized as a mental phenomenon rather than a true spiritual revelation. Schucman herself was a clinical psychologist, and some declare that the voice she noticed might have been a manifestation of her subconscious mind rather than an additional heavenly entity. Additionally, Schucman stated ambivalence about the task and its roots, sometimes wondering its authenticity herself. That ambivalence, along with the method of the text's party, portrays doubt on the legitimacy of ACIM as a divinely encouraged scripture.