Theologically, ACIM deviates significantly from conventional Christian doctrines, which casts doubt on its legitimacy as a religious text claiming to be authored by Jesus Christ. Popular Christianity is built on the teachings of the Bible, which assert the reality of crime, the requisite of Christ's atoning sacrifice, and the significance of faith in Jesus for salvation. ACIM, however, denies the fact of crime, watching it instead as a misperception, and dismisses the necessity for atonement through Christ's sacrifice, advocating instead for your own awareness to the inherent heavenly character within each individual. That revolutionary departure from orthodox Christian beliefs increases issues about the credibility of ACIM's purported heavenly source. If the teachings of ACIM contradict the core tenets of Christianity, it becomes complicated to reconcile their states with the established religious convention it purports to align with.

Psychologically, the course's increased exposure of the illusory character of putting up with and the energy of your head to generate truth could be equally issuing and possibly dangerous. Using one hand, the proven fact that we are able to transcend suffering via a change in belief may empower individuals to assume control of these emotional and psychological states, fostering an expression of company and internal peace. On one other give, this perspective can result in an application of religious bypassing, where persons ignore or ignore real-life problems and mental suffering under the non dual teachers guise of spiritual insight. By training that all negative experiences are mere projections of the pride, ACIM might unintentionally encourage persons in order to avoid addressing main psychological dilemmas or interesting with the real-world factors behind their distress. This method can be specially dangerous for people working with serious mental health conditions, as it might reduce them from seeking necessary medical or therapeutic interventions.

Empirically, there's small to no clinical evidence supporting the metaphysical claims produced by ACIM. The indisputable fact that the bodily earth can be an dream developed by our collective pride lacks scientific help and operates table to the substantial human anatomy of scientific information accumulated through centuries of observation and experimentation. While subjective activities of transcendence and spiritual awakening are well-documented, they don't offer objective proof of the non-dualistic truth that ACIM describes. Furthermore, the course's assertion that adjusting one's thoughts can transform reality in a literal sense is reminiscent of the New Believed action and the more new law of interest, both of which have been criticized for missing medical validity. The placebo effect and the energy of good thinking are well-documented phenomena, but they do not support the grand metaphysical states created by ACIM.

Moreover, the beginnings of ACIM increase extra questions about its credibility. Helen Schucman, the psychiatrist who transcribed the program, described her knowledge as receiving dictation from an interior voice she discovered as Jesus. This process of channeled writing is not distinctive to ACIM and are available in various other spiritual and religious texts during history. The subjective character of those activities causes it to be hard to confirm their authenticity. Authorities argue that such texts are more likely services and products of the subconscious mind rather than communications from the heavenly source. Schucman himself had a complex connection with the material, reportedly experiencing substantial inner struggle about their content and their roots, which gives still another coating of ambiguity to the course's states of divine authorship.