Jesus isn't dead.
"but we proclaim Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles,"
The cross is the start of our faith, and the start of our theology. It is on the cross where Jesus says, "my God, My God, why did you forsake me?" which is true and not true at the same time. Here God dies, here we face defeat, yet call it victory, here we face death, yet hope for life, here we face the sting of the mockers, and, the painful part is their mocking is true, if Jesus be the Savior, prove it, come down from there. Even Peter rebuked Jesus when Jesus mentioned getting killed in Jerusalem. If we don't face the cross, and all it means, we can't really function as Christians. Oh, we want to avoid the cross, to run to the resurrection, paper over it with rationalisms, but this is running from the cross.
Lots of bad theology comes from ignoring the cross. How about the prosperity gospel? That is a great example of a movement within the Church that ignores the cross and falls into what Luther would call a "theology of glory" (not a good thing, look up theology of glory vs theology of the cross)
To embrace the cross fully in our theology is to recognize that we can't really "prove it" and argue it rationally. Paul admits so in Corinthians. The cross was, and is, and always will be foolishness to Gentiles.
There is plenty of good material out there calling into question the theory of macro-evolution.
Ah, now we have moved the argument to being an argument about the Bible. The kind of apologetics you are interested in is all about
proving the Bible is right on creation (Bible is science)
proving the Bible is right on history/archaeology/chronology (Bible is video camera to history)
Bible is rational, consistent, never conflicts, inerrant, infallible, indeed, the Bible is perfect. (Bible as perfect logical answer book)
Honestly, Christian faith is not about these things. Let's start with John chapter 1. The Word of God (all that is perfect and holy) is made flesh and walks among us. The Word is incarnated, not into a book, but into a human named Jesus. In Jesus all the divinity of God dwelled. Jesus is the hub of our faith, our center, our cornerstone, vine, resurrection, life, truth, etc, etc, etc. Okay, so, after Jesus is ascended, where does the Word go? Well, the Body of Christ is the Church. The WORD is preached. So, the incarnation of the WORD, is (according to the Bible) in the Church and is known through proclamation of the Gospel in preaching. The Bible happens to be an expression of that preaching (much of the New Testament is filled with sermons, and parables and letters which were meant to be read to the assembled faithful. And so, yes, the Bible, like preaching, like prophetic words of the prophets, like words spoken in theophanies, like the preaching of Christ, like the sacraments are all expressions of the WORD of God, who is Christ.
Christian faith is not about the Bible, because the Bible doesn't talk about "the Bible". The Bible does on occasion talk about scripture. But in almost all circumstances, New Testament references to scripture are references to Old Testament writings. Yes, in the Old Testament, God comes down and delivers a Law on stone tablets. But, in the New Testament, God comes down and is incarnate in a person. BIG difference.
..
..
But why can't we have a perfect Bible? Why can't we prove that the Bible has no internal contradictions, no contradictions with science or history or archaeology?
Because we read the Bible. And when we read the Bible, really, really carefully, it is obvious, very obvious, that there is more going on a straight "video camera" of history. Genesis 1 is a different creation story than Genesis 2. Just reading them side by side, and it is clear, these are disconnected stories. Also, if we read the Bible carefully, we see that according to the various authors, the world is flat. It has "ends", the sky is a firmament, the sun goes its course around the sky and goes to its tent in the evening. Just read Psalm 19, and based off of that, tell me what the cosmos looks like? The authors write from the position of an earthling, with the perspective of standing on the surface of earth. The author sees the sun move, and the planet stays still. The heavens are a dome, not an endlessly deep universe. psalm 19 verse six, (the sun's) rising is from the end of the heavens, and its circuit to the end of them. And no, the sun does not zip across the known universe in the time we call a day. Nothing about Genesis 1, or Psalm 19, or Job or any of the other passages that describe the cosmos can in any way be considered scientific statements about the cosmos. So, if the authors of Psalms (and Genesis 1) treat the cosmos in such a non-scientific way, why are we claiming that their perspective on timelines is to be taken as absolute truth?
Same with the New Testament. Four gospels are four different treatments of the life of Christ. Galatians story of Paul's conversion is not the same as Acts story of Paul's conversion. But, we don't throw out the stories, we let the differences between writers teach us something.