From the theological perception, ACIM diverges somewhat from orthodox Religious doctrine. Standard Christianity is seated in the belief of a transcendent God, the divinity of Jesus Christ, and the significance of the Bible as the best spiritual authority. ACIM, but, gift ideas a see of Lord and Jesus that differs markedly. It identifies Jesus much less the unique of but as one of many beings who have recognized their correct nature within God. That non-dualistic strategy, wherever God and creation are seen as fundamentally one, contradicts the dualistic nature of mainstream Religious theology, which considers God  specific from His creation. Additionally, ACIM downplays the significance of sin and the necessity for salvation through Jesus Christ's atonement, key tenets of Religious faith. Instead, it posits that failure is definitely an impression and that salvation is just a matter of correcting one's notion of reality. This radical departure from established Religious beliefs leads several theologians to dismiss ACIM as heretical or incompatible with standard Religious faith.

From the mental viewpoint, the beginnings of ACIM increase questions about its validity. Helen Schucman, the principal scribe of the text, said that the language were formed to her by an inner style she discovered as Jesus. This process of obtaining the writing through internal dictation, known as channeling, is usually met with skepticism. Authorities fight that channeling can be recognized as a emotional phenomenon rather than a authentic religious revelation. Schucman herself was a medical psychologist, and some claim that the style she heard may have been a manifestation of her subconscious mind as opposed to an external heavenly entity. Moreover, Schucman indicated ambivalence about the task and their beginnings, sometimes asking its credibility herself. This ambivalence, in conjunction with the method of the text's party, portrays uncertainty on the legitimacy of ACIM as a divinely encouraged scripture.

This content of ACIM also encourages scrutiny from the philosophical angle. The course teaches that the entire world we see with this feelings can be an impression and which our correct reality lies beyond this physical realm. This idealistic see, which echoes certain Eastern concepts, difficulties the materialistic and empirical foundations of Western thought. Experts disagree that the declare that the physical world is definitely an impression is not substantiated by scientific evidence and goes table to the medical process, which utilizes observable and measurable phenomena. The notion of an illusory world may be compelling as a metaphor for the distortions of belief due to the ego, but as a literal assertion, it lacks the scientific support required to certainly be a valid representation of reality.

More over, the sensible software of ACIM's teachings may be problematic. The program advocates for a revolutionary type of forgiveness, indicating that all issues are illusions and must certanly be neglected in favor of knowing the natural unity of all beings. As the training of forgiveness can indeed be therapeutic and transformative, ACIM's method might lead individuals to control respectable feelings and dismiss actual injustices. By framing all bad experiences as illusions produced by the ego, there's a threat of minimizing or invalidating the existed experiences of putting up with and trauma. This perception can be especially hazardous for individuals coping with critical issues such as for instance abuse or oppression, as it may discourage them from seeking the necessary support and interventions.