so the mainstream of Christianity dont believe the bible then?
is their a version that says which bits are true and false then ?
Many (probably most?) Christians don’t look at the Bible in those terms, and nor was much of it written to be viewed in those terms. So it’s not about whether something is necessarily “true or false” in the sense that you look at a news report and decide whether it’s reporting objective fact or is “fake news” – it’s a religious text, it’s about sprituality and morality, not a Haynes Manual for a planet or a species.
So for many Christians the question doesn’t arise in the way you’ve formed it. To take one example, that stuff about the death and resurrection of Christ is not really at its core about a David Copperfield style corpse resuscitation trick is it?
You can “believe the Bible” in the sense that you recognise a higher power, feel their love, conform to the outlook on the world that comes with it, without having to calculate all the “begats” and assert that the planet can only be a few thousand years old.
If people in Biblical times approached it all in the way this debate is now framed, there would have been hecklers when Jesus preached, asking for the name of the Samaritan, their hospital records, CCTV footage of the robbery and the others passing by and not helping. I.e. completely missing the point of the story.
I’m a 100% atheist, but I’m not arrogant enough to assert that everyone with religious faith is a blind idiot. The ones that miss the whole point and get tied up in knots about fossil records though, they are blind idiots imho.