I didn’t use BJU for science, I used Abeka, and my daughter had a fine understanding of the ToE.
They present it correctly and explain why they reject it.
She took the NYS Biology regents and got all the questions on the evolution section of the exam correct except one, all based on what Abeka taught.
What’s ironic, is that Christian schools across the country use Abeka for science education and they have to have their students pass whatever is given for year end exams in the subject. Abeka NEEDS to present it correctly so that these kids can pass.
The problem is, is that to the scientist/evolutionist way of thinking, if you don’t accept the ToE as fact, that means that you don’t understand it.
If you really understood it, you’d find the evidence for it so overwhelmingly convincing that you’d have no choice but to accept it.
It’s simply inconceivable to them that someone could understand ToE as explained and still reject it as an adequate explanation of how life arose on the earth.
Abeka’s a good book. Very heavy into plant and animal life.
I use the BJU, although I do find it a little heavy handed in the religious dept, because I love the way it is outlined so clearly and it also has the best diagrams. It had diagrams that I wished I had had when I was in school.
A third consideration is it is slightly cheaper, very important right now.
There is a whole chapter on evolution which I approach by assigning oral topics to the kids. Then they give a speech in front of their class on each topic, and do debates pro and anti evolution. By the time we finish they have formed their own opinions, and are ready to do more reading on their own - the only way to really learn.
Oh, how the left hates independent thinkers.