The lever action was invented in the 1860s, so how come during world war one they were opted out in exchange for older bolt action rifles? They could fire much faster, and (at least to me) would seem like a great weapon for raiding the trench due to the high-intensity, close-quarter combat.
There's two parts of this - the technological and historical reasons against adoption, and the somewhat flawed underlying assumptions you're making.
I'll start with the technology of it. Ignoring the institutional resistance all over the world towards magazine rifles, lever-action rifles through most of their early history suffered from material and technological limitations that made them impractical for the fairly powerful standard service cartridges of the time. Take the US standard cartridge of the time, .45-70. While the US Army had adopted the .45-70 cartridge in the early 1870s, it wouldn't be until 1886 that Winchester had developed a lever-action design capable of handling cartridges of that power.
By 1886, however, .45-70 and similar black-powder cartridges had become obsolete by the advent of smokeless powder. New, more powerful cartridges came into service across the world, and once again lever-action designs fell behind due to their inability to handle the stresses produced by these new cartridges.
By the late 1890s, both Winchester and Savage had developed rifles capable of firing the standard service cartridges of the time (most famous being the Winchester Model 1895), but by that point it was too late to see mass adoption. Bolt-actions had already been adopted the world over, so, outside of some niche scenarios like the mass Russian order of Winchester 1895s or the much smaller use of Savage 1895s by Canadian home guards during WW1, there was no reason to switch to lever-actions for standard service rifles.
Then there's the issue of some of your underlying assumptions. Lever-actions may seem faster than a bolt-action at a glance, but the reality is a lot more complicated. The speed at which a rifle's bolt can be worked varies greatly by design, and it can vary from the infamously difficult Mosin Nagant bolt to the near-legendarily fast Lee-Enfield. Similarly, lever-action designs vary widely in their handling. The Winchester 1895's lever was fairly awkward and clunky due to the unusual mechanics required to accommodate larger full-powered rifle cartridges. While speed of working the action may vary depending on training and preferences, the Winchester 1895 held no unusual advantages in speed of working the action. Even with older designs chambered in lighter cartridges, the lever can be much harder to work than one might expect, and it's generally only in cartridges unacceptably light for WW1-era militaries that the action would be workable as fast as one might see in a movie.
The question was earlier asked and answered here, u/Meesus again being the one to highlight the problems that lever-actions had compared to bolt actions.
Bolt-action rifles had also discarded tubular magazines in favor of box magazines, so they could be much more quickly reloaded from stripper clips. You can see an example of that here . It's one of many videos posted on YouTube by people with SMLE's trying to see if the "Mad Minute" ( 10 rounds in one minute) was possible. .