Furthermore, the language and design of ACIM are often criticized to be very complex and esoteric. The course's heavy and similar prose may be challenging to understand and interpret, ultimately causing confusion and misinterpretation among readers. That difficulty can cause a buffer to entry, which makes it problematic for individuals to fully engage with and benefit from the course. Some authorities disagree that the convoluted language is a purposeful technique to obscure having less substantive material and to generate an dream of profundity. The issue in comprehending the material can also cause a reliance on additional teachers and interpreters, more perpetuating the commercialization and prospect of exploitation within the ACIM community.

Moreover, the thought of forgiveness as shown in ACIM has been criticized for being overly simplified and probably dismissive of true damage and injustice. The course advocates for an application of forgiveness that involves recognizing david hoffmeister  the illusory character of the observed offense and allowing go of grievances. While this process may be helpful in marketing internal peace and reducing particular putting up with, it might not acceptably handle the complexities of specific conditions, such as abuse or endemic injustice. Experts disagree that kind of forgiveness is visible as minimizing the experiences of victims and absolving perpetrators of accountability. This could result in a questionnaire of religious skipping, where individuals use religious concepts to prevent coping with uncomfortable emotions and difficult realities.

The overall worldview shown by ACIM, which emphasizes the illusory character of the material world and the confidence, can also be problematic. That perspective can lead to a questionnaire of religious escapism, where people disengage from the bodily earth and their difficulties and only an idealized spiritual reality. While this can offer temporary relief or a sense of transcendence, it can also create a not enough engagement with crucial facets of living, such as associations, responsibilities, and social issues. Experts fight that this disengagement may be detrimental to both the individual and culture, because it advances a questionnaire of passivity and neglect of real-world problems.

The exclusivity of ACIM is still another level of contention. The course often occurs as an excellent spiritual journey, hinting that other spiritual or spiritual traditions are less legitimate or effective. That exclusivity can foster a feeling of religious elitism among adherents and create team as opposed to unity. In addition it restricts the potential for people to pull on a diverse range of spiritual resources and traditions in their particular development and healing. Experts argue that the more inclusive and integrative approach to spirituality could be more valuable and less divisive.